The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-05-17
DISTRICT COURT JUSTICE.

There tried yesterday, in supreme Court, Spe-
cal Term, before Judge Van Brunt, a soncwhat pecn-
liar suit, in which John n. Roster plaintiff az
William Ii. Ritter and Judge Frederick G. Gcdncy de-
PENDANTS. IL appeared from the testimony the
that action Tor rent and taxes brought BY Rttcr
against Roster tried In the Eighth District Court,
before judge Gcdncy, on April L. 1876 On That trial
1t appeared that the doicnunnt therein, Roster wins
not liable Tor the taxes aud rent sued for but the Jus
ice reserved his decision. subsequently and on he
18th Of April, the Justice stated open court in the
presence OF Nr. Wrsat, the attorney IN TACT OF Ritter
aud OF tho law attorneys in tho action, that he had
rendered Judgment for Roster the defendant The day
before this the Justice, IN answer 10 clo
gram from Messrs. Miller and Peckham. Rosters atior-
ncys sad by telegram Judgment Tor defendant. !"
Rosters attorneys then sought 10 obtain Transcript
OF the Judgment but tue clerk denied that any
judgment had been rendered, repeating suth
denial tour or five subsequent occnsion4
until The eight Gays had elapsed withln which juus>
mcnt must be rendered The next heard oil the ease
on he pa OF June, hen tho court aicpanut q
Tie Justice called upon Rosters attorneys. lfuviuk
with him written stipulation conscnlins ~ Tho sntry
pi judgment vtnn leu days. and snylng The justice
wished To compete his unhn shed business ~ Le WIS
gong Out OF town on account Of hts health and would
unsldcr the consent favor. The stipulation WAS
signed, but without any authority from Roster Rt
crs attorney also signed " subsequently, being nuthor
iz so TO do ana within the en- days on lie both Of
June Rosters attorneys demanded OF tho Clerk OF the
Court transcript OF The judgment, if any had been en-
tered and the papers used on the trial. The CLERK
that no judgment had been rendered aud papers Ia
the then on hc. ltappcars according 10 tho
testimony now that judgment had boen entered on the
23d OF une IN nv0r Of Ritter Tor SOL and not favor
OF Roster the Justice had before stated, anu That
Wright and the attorneys OF Ritter, after consultation
together, had directed the Clerk not 10 issue any
execution deliver any transcript until twenty days,
within which appeal had 10 DO taken, had elapsed
On the 10TH OF july, alter the twenty days had ex-
pircd, Rtter's attorney issued execution Tor tho iull
AMOUNT OF tho Judgment, although the very rent sued
Tor IN the action had been paid by Mak \. Fox, Who
was the occupant OF the premises, To Wright the at
.orney in TACT OF Ritter Tho attempt to levy under
hs execution the rst intimation 10 Roster or bis
ter moved before Justice Gedney to have The Judgment
vacated aud to stay us execution on the foregoing
state OF facts The Justice made an order declaring
tho judgment vacated ana restraining lis enforce
mcnt. aud wiling 10 do all in MS power o correct
the error, claiming that he judgment had been
entered ny mistake, the action beng cohoundcd with
another. This order WAS not made, however, until
scr Rosters counsel hui Icd n bi In equity IN tho
Buprcmc Court against Ritter anu the Justice TO
the judgment on the ground o fraud and IN the
meantime obtaining temporary injunction fcstrain-
Ing al parties from Ito enforcement, which IN
Junction. alter :uI argument, continued ny judge
Wcstbrook nrtsi the lnal termination OF the action
Tins sui; ans injunction made the Justiccs order uf.
necessary. even u II had any force IN law. On the
trial yesterday the foregoing wrrc substantially the
facts developed on the part OF Mr.. Roster. ana were
not materially c0ntrad'ctcd the other side. Judge
Van Brunt promptly gave judgment IN favor Of plain
tn vaca.ing tue judgment IN the Justices Court anu
OH PROCEEDINGS under ". with costs and allowance
rsans tho defendant Ritter aad without costs against
tho Justice.