Case Name: PACIFIC POSTAL TELEGRAPH CABLE COMPANY v. O'CONNOR
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1888-11-19
Citations: 128 U.S. 394
Docket Number: No. 1282
Parties: PACIFIC POSTAL TELEGRAPH CABLE COMPANY v. O’CONNOR.
Judges: 
Reporter: United States Reports
Volume: 128
Pages: 394–395

Head Matter:
PACIFIC POSTAL TELEGRAPH CABLE COMPANY v. O’CONNOR.
error to the circuit court of the united states for the NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 1282.
Submitted November 12, 1888.
Decided November 19, 1888.
-A remittitur, in a judgment on a verdict, of all sums in excess of $5000, made on the day following entrj of the judgment, on motion of plaintiff’s counsel, in the absence of defendant or his counsel, is no abuse of the discretion of the court.
Motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction.. The case is stated in the opinion.
Mr. J>. M. Delmas for the motion.
Mr. Andrew Wesley Kent opposing.

Opinion:
Mr. Chief Justice Fuller
delivered the opinion of the court.
This was an action to recover damages for personal injuries, which resulted, August 29th, 1888, in a. verdict for $5500. Upon the return of the verdict the court directed, as minuted by the - clerk, judgment to be entered thereon. On the 30th day of August the plaintiff below, by his counsel, asked leave , in open court to remit the. sum of $500,- which was granted, and judgment rendered for $5000 and costs, "and-now so appears of record."
• Subsequently the defendant below moved to set aside the allowance of the remittitur and to correct the judgment, which motion was denied by the court, and defendant ex cepted', and by bill of exceptions brought the court's direction to the clerk of August 29th into the record, and the fact that, the judgment of August 30th was rendered in the absence of defendant and his counsel.
A writ of error having been subsequently prostecuted to' reverse the judgment, defendant in. error moves to dismiss'it for want of jurisdiction.
We cannot hold upon this record the action of the Circuit Court to have been in abuse of its discretion, and as the judgment as it stands is for $5000 only, the motion to dismiss must be granted. Ala. Gold Life Ins. Co. v. Nichols, 109 U. S. 232; First Nat. Bank of Omaha v. Redick, 110 U. S. 224; Thompson v. Butler, 95 U. S. 694.
Writ of error dismissed.