CHAPTER XVII.

JUDGMENTS.

In Knight v. Illinois C. R. Co. 103 C. C. A. 514, 180 Fed. 372, it is said that section 914, U. S. Rev. Stat., U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 684, applies to the mode of entering and recording judgments, including provisions for entering judgments against one or more defendants in the suit, citing Sawin v. Kenny, 93 U. S. 289, 23 L. ed. 926. By act of August, 1888, 25 Stat. at L. 357, chap. 729, sec. 2, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 701, the clerks of the several courts of the United States shall prepare and keep in their respective offices complete and convenient indices, direct and cross, of the judgment records of said courts, which shall be at all times open to the inspection of the public. (See Liens of Judgments.)

Judgments will not be reversed for the want of form, or for defects. U. S. Rev. Stat. sec. 954, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p.

696.

Judgments by Default.

The United States courts may prescribe their own rules for taking and entering judgments by default. U. S. Rev. Stat. sec. 918, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 685.

Amending Judgments.

The courts can amend any defect or want of form in a judgment. Sec. 954, U. S. Rev. Stat., U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 696.

Interest on.

By U. S. Rev. Stat. sec. 966, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 700, interest is allowed on all judgments, and may be levied under process by execution issued thereon in all cases whereby the

law of the State interest may be assessed and collected under process by execution, and it shall be calculated from the date of the judgment at such rate as is allowed by law on judgments recovered in the State. Texas & P. R. Co. v. Anderson, 149 U. S. 242, 37 L. ed. 719, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 843.

Setting Aside During Term.

The trial court may amend, modify, or set aside its judgment during the term in which it is entered. This power is inherent, and settled beyond controversy. Southern P. R. Co. v. Kelley, 109 C. C. A. 657, 187 Fed. 939, and cases cited.

Setting Aside After the Term.

It is equally well settled that a court of law cannot change or modify substantially its judgment after the term has expired, or set it aside, whatever may be the State law or practice (Bronson v. Schulten, 104 U. S. 410, 26 L. ed. 797; Phillips v. Negley, 117 U. S. 665, 29 L. ed. 1013; Taylor v. Easton, 103 C. C. A. 509, 180 Fed. 368; Klever v. Seawall, 12 C. C. A. 653, 22 U. S. App. 458, 65 Fed. 378, see Travelers' Protective Asso. v. Gilbert, 55 L.R.A. 538, 49 C. C. A. 309, 111 Fed. 276), except in cases when a writ of error coram nobis is applicable at common law (Phillips v. Negley, supra; Hickman v. Ft. Scott, 141 U. S. 415, 35 L. ed. 775, 12 Sup. Ct. Rep. 9); but equity will relieve when the law cannot, when there is fraud or imperative equitable grounds (see Johnson v. Waters, 111 U. S. 667, 28 L. ed. 556, 4 Sup. Ct. Rep. 619; Arrowsmith v. Gleason, 129 U. S. 86, 32 L. ed. 630, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 237; Platt v. Threadgild, 80 Fed. 194).

Judgments Nunc Pro Tune.

The entering of judgment nunc pro tunc is usually controlled by the rules of the trial court. The granting of the motion is discretionary, and refusal is consequently not appealable.

Where the clerk neglected to enter a judgment pursuant to the order of the court, it could not be entered nunc pro tunc after

the term. Pressed Steel Car Co. v. Steel Car Forge Co. 79 C. C. A. 130, 149 Fed. 182.

Revival of Judgments.

Where a judgment becomes "dormant," it must be revived before execution can issue. King v. Davis, 137 Fed. 204. See General Electric Co. v. Hurd, 171 Fed. 984. And the procedure by sci. fa. may conform to the State practice where there is no rule by the trial court governing the procedure. King v. Davis, supra; Egan v. Chicago G. W. R. Co. 163 Fed. 345. See Green v. Barrett, 123 Fed. 349, where the right of revival as to suits against executors (U. S. Rev. Stat. section 944) may be controlled by State laws.

The revival of judgments is based on the power of the court to control its judgments until satisfied, which includes the power to issue writs to revive it and prescribe the method of service of such writs. Collin County Nat. Bank v. Hughes, 81 C. C. A. 556, 152 Fed. 414, same case 83 C. C. A. 661, 155 Fed. 390. This power cannot be impaired by State legislation. 152 Fed. p. 415, and cases cited. The proceeding to revive is but the continuance of the suit, and a supplementary remedy to enforce the judgment. 152 Fed. 415, U. S. Rev. Stat. sec. 716, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 580. Lafayette County v. Wonderly, 34 C. C. A. 360, 92 Fed. 313; United States v. Payne, 147 U. S. 687, 37 L. ed. 332, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 442; Insley v. United States, 150 U. S. 512, 37 L. ed. 1163, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 158.

Summary Judgments.

Where the statutes of the State authorize a summary judgment against sureties on bonds, the Federal courts will enter the same judgments under like conditions. Egan v. Chicago G. W. R. Co. 163 Fed. 344.

Limitation to Judgments.

The laws of limitation of the State in which the judgment is entered apply. Metcalf v. Watertown, 153 U. S. 671, 38 L. ed.

861, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 947; General Electric Co. v. Hurd, 171 Fed. 984.

Agreed Judgment.

A judgment entered by consent is not appealable. Ballot v. United States, 96 C. C. A. 360, 171 Fed. 404.

Enforcement of Judgments.

By sec. 916, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 684, a party recovering a judgment in a common-law cause in a Federal court is entitled to similar remedies, by execution or otherwise, as are now provided in like causes by the laws of the State in which the court is held, or by laws of the State hereinafter enacted which may be adopted by rules of the court; and the Federal courts are authorized by general rule to adopt such State laws as may hereafter be in force in relation to remedies upon judgments. See Kaill v. St. Landry Parish, 194 Fed. 73-76, and cases cited (see Executions).

Liens of Judgments

The act of August 1, 1888, amended by act of March 2, 1895, regulating the lien of judgments, prescribes that judgments and decrees rendered in the district courts of the United States within any State shall be liens on property throughout such State, in the same manner and to the same extent and under the same conditions only as if such judgment had been rendered by a court of general jurisdiction of such State; Provided, that whenever the laws of any State require a judgment of a State court to be registered, recorded, docketed, and indexed, or any other thing to be done in a particular manner or in a certain office or county or parish of Louisiana, before a lien shall attach, this act shall be applicable therein, and only when the laws of such State shall authorize judgments of the United States courts to be registered, recorded, docketed, indexed, or otherwise conformed to the rules and requirements relating to the judgments of the courts of the States.

Sec. 2. That the clerks of the several courts of the United States shall prepare and keep in their respective offices complete and convenient indices and cross indices of the judgment records of said courts; and such indices and records shall be at all times open to the examination and inspection of the public.

Sec. 3. That nothing herein contained shall be construed to require the docketing of a judgment of a United States court, as the filing of a transcript thereof, in any State office within the same county or parish of Louisiana in which the judgment is rendered, in order that such judgment shall be a lien on any property within such county, if the clerk of the United States court be required by law to have a permanent office and a judg ment record open at all times for public inspection in such county or parish.

When Judgments Cease to be Liens.

By section 967, U. S. Rev. Stat., U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 700, judgments cease to be liens, within any State, on real estate or chattels real, in the same manner and at like periods as judgments and decrees of the courts of such State cease by law to be liens thereon. It will be seen by the above acts that the judgments of the courts of the United States and the liens acquired by them must conform to State laws which give to their judgments the force of liens on real property. See General Electric Co. v. Hurd, 171 Fed. 984; Cooke v. Avery, 147 U. S. 387, 37 L. ed. 213, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 340.

Execution.

By sec. 916, U. S. Rev. Stat., U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 684, it is provided that a party recovering a judgment in any common-law cause in any circuit or district court of the United States shall be entitled to similar remedies on the same, by execution or otherwise, to reach the property of the judgment debtor, as are now provided in like causes by the laws of the State in which such court is held, or by any such laws hereafter enacted which may be adopted by general rules of such circuit or district court; and such courts may from time to time by general rules