35 Am. St. Rep. 267 | Idaho | 1891
The first question to he considered is, Is this a judgment from which an appeal can be taken ? If there is no judgment no appeal can be taken, and this court has no jurisdiction. (Grey v. Cederholm, 2 Idaho, 34, 3 Pac. 12; Meysan v. Chabrie (Cal.), 7 Pac. 634; Stebbins v. Savage, 5 Mont. 253, 5 Pac. 278.) Section 4807 of the Revised Statutes of Idaho, is as follows: “An appeal may he taken to the supreme court from a district court; first, from a final judgment in an action or special proceeding commenced in the court in which the same is rendered within one year after the entry of judgment.” In McLaughlin v. Doherty, 54 Cal. 519, the court states as follows: “Section 939 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that an appeal may be taken from the final judgment within one year after the entry of judgment.” It will be noticed that the wording is the same as our own statute. In Gray v. Palmer, 28 Cal. 416, this provision of the practice act was before the court for construction, and the court in its opinion defined with precision the distinction between the rendition and entry of a final judgment within the meaning of that act. The distinction which the court made was that a judgment is rendered when ordered by the court, and entered when actually entered in the judgment-book. (See, also, Trenouth v. Farrington, 54 Cal. 273.) In the case of McNevin v. McNevin, 11 Pac. C. L. J. 92, the journal entry was in the following language: “Ordered that plaintiff’s prayer for a decree of divorce be denied, and that defendant have judgment for costs.” The court held this to be an order for judgment only, and dismissed the appeal. The same was held in the case of Thomas v. Anderson, 55 Cal. 43. Both these eases were approved in Schroder v. Schmidt, 71
