Schloss v. George E. Lennon, Inc.

• Decision Date: 21 November 1913
• Citation: 144 N.W. 148,123 Minn. 420
• Parties: SCHLOSS v. GEORGE E. LENNON, Inc.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

123 Minn. 420

144 N.W. 148

SCHLOSS

v.GEORGE E. LENNON, Inc.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Nov. 21, 1913.

Appeal from District Court, Ramsey County; Frederick N. Dickson, Judge.

Action by Morris F. Schloss, etc., against George E. Lennon, Incorporated. Directed verdict for defendant, and from an order that the verdict and judgment thereon be corrected, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

Courts possess the power to correct formal or clerical errors in a directed verdict and the judgment based thereon, so that the record will truly set forth the actual decision given, and may do so after the verdict is recorded, and after the expiration of the time to appeal from the judgment. Charles E. Bowen, of St. Paul (C. W. Cummins, of St. Paul, of counsel), for appellant.

Wm. B. Henderson, Earl H. Miller, and Durment, Moore & Oppenheimer, all of St. Paul, for respondent.

HOLT, J.

Action to recover the balance due for goods sold and delivered. The answer was a general denial, and in abatement the pendency of another suit upon the same cause of action. Upon the trial defendant admitted the debt, and the sole issue litigated was the pendency of the prior action. At the conclusion of the evidence each party moved for a directed verdict. The court denied plaintiff's motion, and granted defendant's, instructing the jury in these words: ‘Upon the evidence as it stands in this case, gentlemen, it appears that there is a prior action pending, and under the law the plaintiff is prevented from asserting his rights under the latest action that he has commenced; he is relegated to his right under the preceding action, which still exists. For this reason the plaintiff is denied any relief in this action, and he is referred to his prior pending action to get his relief. You may return a verdict in favor of the defendant.’ The verdict rendered and recorded was a general verdict for defendant, and pursuant thereto a judgment was entered June 8, 1912, that plaintiff take nothing and that defendant have and recover $15.90 costs and disbursements. Plaintiff paid these. Subsequently, and on March 28, 1913, the court on plaintiff's motion ordered the verdict and judgment corrected, so that the verdict would read, ‘We, the jury in the above-entitled action, find a verdict in favor of defendant that there is a prior action now pending between the parties hereto for the same cause of action sued on herein,’ and the judgment to correspond. Defendant appeals from the order.

The contention of appellant is that the court lacks power to correct a verdict after it is recorded and a judgment after the time to appeal has expired or it has been satisfied. We concede that the court may not substitute its judgment for that of the jury on disputed questions of fact embodied in a verdict, nor may judicial error found in a judgment be corrected after the time to appeal has passed. But it is well settled that clerical errors or misprisions may be corrected by the court without being limited strictly to the term at which the trial took place or to the time within which an appeal may be taken. Coit v. Waples, 1 Minn. 134 (Gil. 110); Bilansky v. State, 3 Minn. 427 (Gil. 313); McClure v. Bruck, 43 Minn. 305, 45 N. W. 438;Crich v. Williamsburg City Fire Ins., 45 Minn. 441, 48 N. W. 198;Chase v....