From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Meyer v. H. Kohn

Supreme Court of California
Oct 1, 1867
33 Cal. 484 (Cal. 1867)


         Appeal from the District Court, Sixth Judicial District, Sacramento County.

         The suit was commenced June 6th, 1864, and the judgment was rendered in the District Court January 10th, 1865. The plaintiffs recovered a general judgment for five thousand four hundred and one dollars, and the judgment directed that it should bear interest at ten per cent per annum.


         Interest is recoverable on contracts for the payment of money from the time the principal ought to have been paid. (Williams v. Sherman, 7 Wend. 109; Still v. Hall, 20 Wend. 51; Pardy v. Phillips, 1 Kernan, 406.) The Court below had nothing to do but to enter a judgment for the disputed interest, in conformity with the motion.

         This Court had already decided that the appellants were entitled to the several amounts by them originally claimed. The interest demanded followed as a legal and necessary sequence. The interest should have been adjudged as an appropriate and natural result. The Court below had no discretion. The appellants were legally entitled to the interest. (Dana et al. v. Fielder, 2 Kern. 40.)

         P. L. Edwards, for Appellants.

          Moore & Alexander, for Respondents.

         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.


          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.

Summaries of

Meyer v. H. Kohn

Supreme Court of California
Oct 1, 1867
33 Cal. 484 (Cal. 1867)
Case details for

Meyer v. H. Kohn

Case Details


Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Oct 1, 1867


33 Cal. 484 (Cal. 1867)

Citing Cases

Stowe v. Superior Court

In a note accompanying the report of this case are a number of decisions of state courts to the same effect.…

State Mortgage Corporation v. Traylor

"Every judgment, when ambiguous as to the party or parties in favor of or against whom it is rendered, must…