Court Opinion

ID: 6739129
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-20 23:20:40.402029+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:01:54.101084
License: Public Domain

Eobinson, J.
This is an action to recover damages by reason of a personal injury sustained by collision with an automobile. The court directed a verdict for the defendant and on that verdict two judgments *30have been entered. On November 21, 1918, pursuant to an order of the court reciting the trial and verdict, a judgment was entered that the defendant do have and recover from the plaintiff the costs and disbursements of the action, taxed at $237.50.
Now a judgment is a final determination of the rights of the parties in the action. Comp. Laws, § 7599. The first judgment showed such a final determination. It recites the verdict of the jury in favor of the defendant and the order for judgment on the same and the amount allowed as costs, but it seems counsel thought the first judgment not good enough, because it did not declare the action dismissed. Hence, on May 7, 1919, a second judgment was entered which is that the defendant have and recover judgment against the plaintiff dismissing the action and for $237.50, his costs. Plainly the second judgment is no better than the first and it is in the form of an order for judgment.
This is an appeal from the second judgment. It was taken October 15, 1919, and after the first judgment had become final. The second judgment was not authorized and it must be reversed and canceled. After one judgment has been entered on a verdict, if it is in any way technically defective, it may be corrected on motion, but the court may not enter a succession of judgments and in that way extend the time for an appeal from the first judgment. The defendant erroneously moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the second judgment is wholly unauthorized and without jurisdiction. But that is cause for canceling and reversing the judgment, and not for dismissing the appeal.
The record is from beginning to end a very bunglesome affair. Hence, without reviewing the merits of the case, the second judgment must be reversed and canceled, and that will leave the first judgment in full force and effect.
Reversed and canceled.
Christianson, Oh. J., and Birdzell, T., concur.