Majority
Headnote
1. Courts—Municipal Court—Jurisdiction—Judgment—Vacation.This case was tried and judgment rendered on January 16, 1906, dismissing the complaint, with costs. On January
“That the judgment of dismissal rendered herein on the 16th day of January, 1906, in fávor of defendant and against the plaintiffs, be, and the same hereby is, corrected by giving and rendering a judgment for the plaintiffs against the defendant for the sum of $17.40, with interest amounting to 87 cents, amounting, in all, to $18.27, as conceded due by the defendant on the trial hereof, as appears by the stenographer’s minutes.”
The only power given a justice of the Municipal Court to “vacate, amend, or modify any judgment” rendered by him is conferred by section 254 of the Municipal Court Act (Laws Í902, p. 1563, c. 580). A motion to “correct” a judgment is simply another way of asking for an amendment or modification "of a judgment. Even if a trial justice can, under the guise of a modification of a judgment, entirely change it from being in favor of a party to one against him, the motion for such purpose must be made within the statutory time (five days),which was not done in this case. Buchsbaum v. Feldman, 43 Misc. Rep. 85 , 86 N. Y. Supp. 747 ; Lissner v. Dochtermann (Sup.) 97 N. Y. Supp. 231 .
The order is reversed, with costs.