Page images
PDF
EPUB

the fact or facts which are regarded as erroneously found or erroneously omitted to be found by the court, with full reference to the evidence which is relied on to support the motion." 5 "A motion founded upon error of law must specify with like minuteness the points upon which the court is supposed to have erred, with references to the authorities relied upon to support the motion."'6 "A motion by the claimant upon the ground of newlydiscovered evidence will not be entertained unless it appear that the newly-discovered evidence came to the knowledge of the claimant, his attorney of record or counsel after the trial and before the motion was made; that it was not for want of due diligence that it did not sooner come to his knowledge; that it is so material that it would probably produce a different judgment if the new trial were granted, and that it is not cumulative. Such motion must be accompanied by the affidavit of the claimant or his attorney of record, setting forth—“First. The facts in detail which the claimant expects to be able to prove, and whether the same are to be proved by witnesses or by documentary evidence. Second. The name, occupation, and residence of each and every witness whom it is proposed to call to prove said facts. Third. That the said facts were unknown to either the claimant or his attorney of record, and, if other counsel was employed at the trial, were unknown to such counsel until after the close of the trial. Fourth. The reasons why the claimant, his attorney of record, or counsel could not have discovered said evidence before the trial by due diligence."7 Motion as for a new trial must also be accompanied by the brief of the moving party, a copy of which must be served upon the opposing party, who may file his brief in response thereto. The motion will be considered by the judges in conference upon such briefs and affidavits, if any, and will then be decided or sent to the law calendar for argument.”'8 A misunderstanding as to a supposed agreement to have a case abide the result of an appeal from

5 Ct. C1. Rule 92. 6 Ct. Cl. Rule 93.

7 Ct. Cl. Rule 94. When the claimant's affidavit on the motion for a new trial shows that the witness on whom he relies is in the

government employ, he may be excused for not presenting the latter's affidavit. Murphy v. U. S., 15 Ct. CI, 217.

8 Ct. CI. Rule 95.

another judgment is a ground for granting a new trial. It has been held that a delay of three years is a sufficient reason for denying a motion by the claimant for a new trial.10 A motion for a new trial, after an interlocutory decree, may be made more than two years subsequently to the decree, when final judgment has not been entered. 11 The court may grant a new trial after an appeal, provided the record has been returned.12

A rehearing on a point presented and considered in the argument and disposition of the case, will not be granted unless desired by one of the judges who rendered judgment.18 When a case has been dismissed for want of prosecution, it will not be reinstated unless the petition states a cause of action.14 An error of law which may be corrected on appeal is not a ground for a new trial.15

$ 684. Judgments in Court of Claims. “Any person who corruptly practices or attempts to practice any fraud against the United States in the proof, statement, establishment, or allowance of any claim, or of any part of any claim against the United States, shall, ipso facto forfeit the same to the Government; and it shall be the duty of the Court of Claims, in such cases, to find specifically that such fraud was practiced or attempted to be practiced, and thereupon to give judgment that such claim is forfeited to the Government, and that the claimant be forever barred from prosecuting the same.” 1 Such a find ing may be made upon a new trial, although the original judgment has been paid, and the claimant fails to appear.?

No interest shall be allowed on any claim up to the time of the rendition of judgment thereon by the Court of Claims, unless

9 Belknap v. U. S., 150 U. S. 588, 37 L. ed. 1191.

10 Figh v. U. S., 3 Ct. Cl. 97.
11 Sampson's Case, 42 Ct. Cl. 378.

12 Roberts v. U. S., 92 U. S. 41, 23 L. ed. 646; Belknap v. U. S., 150 U. S. 588, 37 L. ed. 1191.

18 Fendall v. U. S., 12 Ct. Cl. 305.

14 Whitney v. U. S., 18 Ct. Cl. 19; Flores v. U. S., 18 Ct. C1. 352; Wade v. U. S., 21 Ct. Cl. 141.

15 Earler v. U. S., 5 Ct. Cl. 708.
$ 684. 1 Jud. Code, $ 172, 36 St.

at L. 1087, re-enacting V. S. R. S., $ 1086. For a form of a judgment in such a case, see Peychaud v. U. S., 16 Ct. Cl. 601, and U. S. v. Moore, 3 MacA. 226, 233.

2 Peychaud v. U. S., 16 Ct. C1. 601. It has been held that the amount of judgment cannot be corrected after its satisfaction, even though there was an arithmetical error in the court's opinion. Russell v. U. S., 15 Ct. C1. 108.

[ocr errors]

upon a contract expressly stipulating for the payment of interest. “Hereafter it shall be the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury to certify to Congress for appropriation only such judgments of the Court of Claims as are not to be appealed, or such appealed cases as shall have been decided by the Supreme Court to be due and payable. And on judgments in favor of claimants which have been appealed by the United States and affirmed by the Supreme Court, interest, at the rate of four per centum per annum, shall be allowed and paid from the date of filing the transcript of judgment in the Treasury Department up to and including the date of the mandate of affirmance by the Supreme Court: Provided, That in no case shall interest be allowed after the term of the Supreme Court at which said judgment was affirmed.” 4 “Any final judgment against the claimant on any claim prosecuted as provided in this chapter shall forever bar any further claim or demand against the United States arising out of the matters involved in the controversy.” 5

or

3 Jud. Code, $ 177, 36 St. at L. 1087, re-enacting U. S. R. S., $ 1091; Hobbs v. U. S., 19 Ct. Cl. 220; Tilson v. U. S., 100 U. S. 43, 25 L. ed. 543; Harvey v. U. S., 113 U. S. 243, 28 L. ed. 987. Sheckels v. District of Columbia, 246 U. S. 338. Where a claim was referred under a special act to the Court of Claims to be determined according to the rules and regulations heretofore adopted by the United States in settlement of like cases, in which interest had been allowed, it was held that interest might be allowed when previously allowed by Congress in the adjustment of like cases. U. S. v. McKee, 91 U. S. 442, 23 L. ed. 326; s. c., as McKee v. U. S., 10 Ct. CI. 208 and 231. Where a factor had filed a claim against the proceeds of captured or abandoned property, which exceeded his original claim, it was held that he might be allowed interest up to the time of the rendi

tion of the judgment. Villalonga v. U. S., 10 Ct. Cl. 428; s. C. as U. S. v. Villalonga, 23 Wall. 35, 23 L. ed. 64.

4 U. S. R. S., $ 1090, superseded as Act of Sept. 30, 1890, ch. 1126, $ 1, 26 St. at L. 537, Comp. St. $ 6406. Interest on a judgment begins to run when a certified copy is presented for payment, and ceases when the mandate of affirmance is issued ordered to be issued. Hobbs v. U. S., 19 Ct. 01. 220. Interest was allowed under the general terms of a special statute in U. S. v. Old Settlers, 148 U. S. 427, 478, 37 L. ed. 509, 510.

5 Jud. Code, $ 179, 36 St. at L. 1087, re-enacting U. S. R. S., $ 1093. It has been held that this section relates only to judgments upon the merits, and does not change the rule of common law, nor does it do more than attach to final judgments the conclusiveness which the com

[ocr errors]

"A final judgment is conclusive, although the Supreme Court subsequently reverses a similar judgment, and holds that the decision of the Court of Claims in the case in question was erroneous.

When a claimant has consented to a judgment against him on a general demurrer, he cannot subsequently sue on the same cause of action with substantially the same averments 7

“In all cases of final judgments by the Court of Claims, or, on appeal, by the Supreme Court, where the same are affirmed in favor of the claimant, the sum due thereby shall be paid out of any general appropriation made by law for the payment and satisfaction of private claims, on presentation to the Secretary of the Treasury of a copy of said judgment, certified by the clerk of the Court of Claims, and signed by the chief justice, or, in his absence, by the presiding judge of said court." 8

“The payment of the amount due by any judgment of the Court of Claims, and of any interest thereon allowed by law, as

mon law ascribes to them. Spicer v. U. S., 5 Ct. Cl. 34. A judgment sustaining a demurrer to a petition which failed to allege the necessary facts does not bar an action founded upon a petition which alleges such fact. Ibid. A judgment of the Court of Claims from which an appeal is taken, is not a final judgment within the meaning of the statute. Green v. U. S., 18 Ct. Cl. 93. A judgment in favor of the United States on a suit for a breach of covenant to furnish specified freight for transportation does not bar an action for the consideration agreed to be paid for the freight actually transported. Shrewsbury v. U. S., 9 Ct. Cl. 263. An action for rent due in instalments may be brought as frequently as the respective sums become due, and a judgment in a suit for one instalment will not bar a suit to recover rent not due at the time when the first petition was filed. Cross v. U. S.,

14 Wall. 479, 20 L. ed. 721; s. C., 8 Ct. Cl. 1; s. C., 5 Ct. Cl. 88.

6 Osborn v. U. S., 9 Ct. Cl. 153. 7 Porter v. U. S., 20 Ct. Cl. 307.

8 U. S. R. S., § 1089. Appropriation acts usually provide that no judgment shall be paid until the right of appeal has expired. See for example, 21 St. at L. 252, ch. 234.

An appeal from a judgment before the right to appeal has expired is not vacated by the appropriation by Congress of the amount to pay the judgment. U. S. v. Jones, 119 U. S. 477, 30 L. ed. 440. It has been held that an appropriation for the payment of "private claims" means claims which the Executive Departments have rejected, or over which they have no jurisdiction; and that the appropriation is for debts not to be paid out of the specific appropriations. Sweeney v. U. S., 5 Ct. Cl. 285, 290; s. C., 8 Ct. Cl. 134; s. C., 17 Wall. 75, 21 L. ed. 575.

provided by law, shall be a full discharge to the United States of all claim and demand touching any of the matters involved in the controversy." 9 The Court of Claims has jurisdiction to inquire whether one of its judgments has been properly executed. 10

§ 685. Costs in the Court of Claims. If the United States puts in issue the plaintiff's right to recover, the court may in its discretion allow the prevailing party, whether plaintiff or defendant, costs from the time of joining such issue.1 The costs include only disbursements for the fees of witnesses and clerks.

8 686. Appeals from Court of Claims. “An appeal to the Supreme Court shall be allowed, on behalf of the United States, from all judgments of the Court of Claims adverse to the United States, and on behalf of the plaintiff in any case where the amount in controversy exceeds three thousand dollars, or where his claim is forfeited to the United States by the judgment of said court, as provided in section one hundred and seventy

The following rule regulates the practice in such appeals: “In all cases hereafter decided in the Court of Claims, in which, by the Act of Congress, such appeals are allowable, they shall be heard in the Supreme Court upon the following record, and none other: 1. A transcript of the pleadings in the case, of the final judgment or decree of the court, and of such interlocutory orders, rulings, judgments, and decrees as may be necessary to a proper review of the case.

2. A finding by the Court of Claims of the facts in the case established by the evidence in the nature of a special verdict, but not the evidence establishing them; and a separate statement of the conclusions of law upon said facts, upon which the court founds its judgment or decree. The find

two.''1

re

9 U. S. R. S., $ 1092. See Hobbs v. U. S., 19 Ct. Cl. 220; U. S. v. Frerichs, 124 U. S. 315, 320, 31 L. ed. 471, 472; s. C. as Freirichs v. U. S., 21 Ct. Cl. 16.

10 Pam-To-Pee v. U. S., 187 U. S. 371, 47 L. ed. 221.

$ 685. 1 Jud. Code, 152, enacting 24 St. at L. 505, $ 15.

2 Jud. Code, g 176, re-enacting 24 St. at L. 505, $ 15.

8 686. 1 Jud. Code, 8242, enacting U. S. R. S., $707. See infra, $ 690.

re

« PreviousContinue »