Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

WILLIAM MEYER, LOUIS WORMSER, and SIMON WORMSER v. H. KOHN (No. 2), and WILLIAM L. DAUTERMAN

         The judgment of the Court below was modified and a general judgment for appellants was entered for one thousand one hundred and twenty-seven dollars and seventy-five cents, and a judgment for four thousand and twenty-six dollars, payable in United States gold coin.

         The Supreme Court not having reversed but modified the judgment of the Court below, and having fixed the several specific amounts to be paid by defendants, and entered judgment accordingly, the District Court has no power to change that decision, but must be controlled by it.

         JUDGES: Currey, C. J.

         OPINION

          CURREY, Judge

         The plaintiffs recovered judgment against the defendants for a certain sum of money; but the judgment did not specify the kind of money, though the plaintiffs claimed that it should have been for United States gold coin. An appeal was taken on that point so drawn in question, and this Court modified the judgment, holding, in effect, that a certain portion of the amount found due was payable in any kind of lawful money, and that the balance was payable in United States gold coin. (29 Cal. 278.) Upon filing the remittitur in the District Court the plaintiffs moved for a judgment for the interest which they claimed had accrued on the demand for which the action was brought, during the interval between the commencement of the action and the rendering of the judgment in the District Court. The motion was denied, and thereupon the plaintiffs excepted and appealed from the order. This Court having determined the exact amounts which the plaintiffs were entitled to have, the District Court could not do otherwise than deny the motion; for conceding that the plaintiffs were entitled at the trial to recover the interest claimed, the District Court had no power at the time the motion was made to further modify the judgment by opening it and adding the interest thereto.

         Order affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Meyer v. H. Kohn
(Oct 1, 1867)