A remittitur, in a judgment on a verdict, of all sums in excess
of $5,000, made on the day following entry of the judgment on
motion of plaintiff's counsel in the absence of defendant or his
counsel, is no abuse of the discretion of the court.
Motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction. The case is stated
in the opinion.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE FULLER delivered the opinion of the Court.
This was an action to recover damages for personal injuries
which resulted August 29th, 1888, in a verdict for $5,500. Upon the
return of the verdict, the court directed, as minuted by the clerk,
judgment to be entered thereon. On the 30th day of August, the
plaintiff below, by his counsel, asked leave in open court to remit
the sum of $500, which was granted, and judgment rendered for
$5,000 and costs, "and now so appears of record."
Subsequently the defendant below moved to set aside the
allowance of the remittitur and to correct the judgment, which
motion was denied by the court, and defendant excepted,
Page 128 U. S. 395
and by bill of exceptions brought the court's direction to the
clerk of August 29th into the record, and the fact that the
judgment of August 30th was rendered in the absence of defendant
and his counsel.
A writ of error having been subsequently prosecuted to reverse
the judgment, defendant in error moves to dismiss it for want of
We cannot hold upon this record the action of the circuit court
to have been in abuse of its discretion, and as the judgment as it
stands is for $5,000 only, the motion to dismiss must be granted.
Ala. Gold Life Ins. Co. v. Nichols, 109 U.
; First Nat. Bank of Omaha v. Redick,
110 U. S. 224
Thompson v. Butler, 95 U. S. 694
Writ of error dismissed.