TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

State ex rel. Vocovitch v. Votaw

STATE ex rel. VOCOVITCH, Resondent v. VOTAW

State ex rel. Vocovitch v. Votaw, 40 P. 597 (Mont. 1895)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Montana Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 17, 1895
Citations
40 P. 59716 Mont. 3081895 Mont. LEXIS 134
Disposition
Affirmed.
Headnotes
Justice of the Peace — New trial — Certiorari.—An order made by a justice oí the peace granting a new trial upon a motion therefor made more than ten days after the entry of judgment, although the notice of such motion was given within the statutory period, is an excess of jurisdiction and will be annulled by certiorari. (Wallace V. Lewis, 9 Mont. 399; State v. Case, 14 Mont. 520, cited.)
Summary
Appeal from First Judicial District, Lewis and Gla/rke Oounty. Certiorari to review order of'justice of the peace in granting new trial. Judgment was rendered for the relator below by Buck, J.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Cu riam.

Certiorari. On February 24, 1894, before A. C. Votaw, a justice of the peace, in an action of claim and delivery, wherein one O. Hermann was plaintiff, and relator and one Suttey were defendants, judgment was rendered in favor of the defendants and against plaintiff. February 26th notice of motion for a new trial was served. On March 8th plaintiff filed statement of grounds and affidavit for setting aside the judgment. Thereafter, defendants moved to strike out plaintiff’s statement on motion for new trial, on the ground that said statement was not filed within the statutory time. On March 16th, thereafter, the justice issued an order vacating and setting aside said judgment, and granting a new trial in said action, against defendants’ objection.

The district court held that the justice exceeded his jurisdiction in setting aside the judgment theretofore rendered. Section 820 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that in cer *309 tain cases a new trial may be granted by a justice of the peace, on motion, within 10 days after the entry of judgment, etc.

It is our opinion that, unless the motion is made within the 10 days after the entry of judgment, the justice has no jurisdiction to act upon it. A notice of motion is not a motion. ( Wallace v. Lewis, 9 Mont. 399 .) More than 10 days having elapsed between the entry of the judgment and the filing of the motion, the district court correctly vacated the order of the justice of the peace setting aside the verdict and judgment in the original case tried before the justice. (State ex rel. Johnson v. Case, 14 Mont. 520 .) Judgment affirmed.

Affirmed.

All concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1907: 12016: 119072026peak 1907 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State ex rel. Porter v. Ritchie91 P. 24 (Utah 1907)
  2. Goodwin v. Fawkes67 V.I. 104 (2016)

Most recent

  1. Goodwin v. Fawkes67 V.I. 104 (2016)
  2. State ex rel. Porter v. Ritchie91 P. 24 (Utah 1907)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Wallace v. Lewis, 9 Mont. 399 (1890) 12
State ex rel. Johnson v. Case, 37 P. 95 (Mont. 1894) 8

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list