Court Opinion

ID: 9639588
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 16:24:42.864622+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:20.107160
License: Public Domain

On Petition for Rehearing.
PER CURIAM.
The appellee urges that it would appear from an examination of the records of the clerk of the District Court that the order of dismissal had been “entered.” The transcript on appeal contains nothing to that effect; the affidavit in opposition merely says that “an order was accordingly entered by this court.” The clerk, not the court, enters judgments and orders, and the allegation is not to be taken as equivalent to an “entry” of the order in the only sense here relevant. Our reversal is on the'record before us. In saying that we do not hold that the motion should be granted, but that the District Court should “consider”" it “on the merits,” we are not to be understood as forbidding an examination as to whether the order of dismissal was in fact “entered,” if that be proved by other evidence. We decline upon this appeal to consider that question by an examination of the records and of the practice of the clerk in dealing with orders of this kind. All such questions must be decided by the District Court in the first instance.
Petition for rehearing denied.