60 N.Y.S. 759 | N.Y. App. Div. | 1899
In December, 1879, the plaintiff’s intestate, William McKinney, in an action brought by him against the city of New York, had a
In 1885 the plaintiff, a daughter of McKinney, having then for the first time learned of the action brought by her father and the judgment entered thereon, was appointed his administratrix, and as such demanded from the city payment of the judgment, with interest thereon from the time of its entry. Payment .was refused and thereupon this action was brought to recover the same. At the trial the facts above stated were not disputed. The defendant, however, urged as a defense that the payment to McKinney’s attorney and the satisfaction given by him discharged the judgment, and, • therefore, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover anything.; The learned trial justice held that the payment to the attorney was riot a defense to the action, except as to the amount of costs which went into the judgment, and he directed a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for the amount of the judgment, with interest from the time of its entry, less the sum of $268.11, costs included therein. Judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff from which the city has appealed.
It insists that the judgment is erroneous and should be reversed because the attorney had authority under the statute to satisfy the judgment, the satisfaction having been given less than two years after its entry. ..We do not think so. It is true that-section 1260 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that a judgment may be canceled and discharged by the clerk at any time within two years, upon filing with him a satisfaction piece describing the judgment and executed .by the attorney of record; but the judgment in
It is also urged by the appellant that the plaintiff is not entitled to interest on the judgment. A judgment under the statute draws interest from the time of its entry. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1211.)
The judgment is right and must be affirmed, with costs.
Van Brunt, P. J., Patterson, O’Brien and. Ingraham, JJ., concurred.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.