Court Opinion

ID: 9810736
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 21:57:10.79451+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:40:10.667167
License: Public Domain

Claris, C. J.,
dissenting: This case was argued upon exceptions to the referee’s report, and, by consent, Judge Adams was to render his decision in vacation and out of the district. The sole question is within what time the appeal must be taken- from such judgment.
Eevisal, 590, provides: “The appeal must be taken from a judgment rendered out of term, within ten days after notice thereof.” The judge finds as a fact, “Mr. Zachary, attorney for defendant, knew the contents of the judgment, which had previously and before signing been submitted to him, and had actual notice of the rendition of the. judgment by letter from the undersigned, written 28 June and from plaintiff’s counsel, written 1 July.”
The judge having found as a fact that the defendant had received “actual notice” of the rendition of the judgment 28 June, *112and again on 1 July, and knew tbe contents of tbe judgment, wbicb bad been previously submitted to him, it would seem tbat under tbe provision of tbe statute, Revisal, 590, tbe appeal should bave been taken “within ten days” after sucb notice.
His Honor's conclusion of law is as follows,, wbicb it seems to me ought to be sustained: “Tbe judgment having been rendered by consent out of term, and in vacation, it was tbe duty 'of tbe defendant, appellant, to take its appeal witbin ten days after notice of tbe.judgment; and as notice of appeal was served on plaintiff on 17 July, more than ten days after notice of tbe judgment, and tbe statement of tbe ease was served on 31 July, tbe court is of tbe opinion tbat neither tbe notice of appeal nor tbe statement on appeal was served witbin tbe time required by law, and for tbat reason disallows defendant’s appeal and orders it to be stricken from tbe files.”
It is true tbat entering tbe judgment on the' docket would give constructive notice to all parties; but here tbe judge finds more than tbat. He finds tbat tbe appellant’s counsel knew tbe contents of tbe judgment, having read it, and tbat afterwards be bad actual notice of- its rendition on 28 June from himself, and also on 1 July by letter from tbe opposing counsel. This fact is not denied. If it bad been, tbe judge would bave passed upon tbe facts, wbicb be did anyway. It is not a question, therefore, whether tbe appellant’s counsel received tbe notice. He does not deny it, and the judge finds tbat be did receive it. "What more could be required? It would be very inconvenient if in sucb cases nothing can be done until tbe clerk sees fit to record tbe judgment, wbicb indeed would not be actual notice, but only constructive. When there is no- notice except tbe constructive notice from filing the judgment in tbe clerk’s office, tbe appeal must be taken witbin ten days thereafter. But when there is actual notice prior to tbat time, why should tbe appeal be delayed until there is a constructive notice ?
It will be noted tbat when judgment is rendered at term-time notice is given in open court or witbin ten days after its rendition, without any requirement tbat tbe clerk shall bave recorded tbe judgment. By what analogy or provision of law, *113when there is actual notice, must the appellant be given ten days after recording a judgment rendered by consent out of term ?
By the plain terms of tbe statute, Kevisal, 590, tbe appeal should be taken “within ten days after notice of the judgment, when rendered out of term,” and “within ten days after its rendition, when rendered in term.” Why should the court change the plain letter of the statute? There is no ambiguity in the statute whatever.