COUDERT v. UNITED STATES

COUDERT v. UNITED STATES. (Circuit Court, S. D. New York. March 30, 1895.) Terms of Court — Amendment of Findings. A motion to amend findings of fact in an action at law in which final judgment was entered October 24, 1894, is not too late, as made after the term, when made in the United States circuit court for the' Southern district of New York on March 15, 1895; for the October term for the trial of actions at law, under Rev. St. § 058, continues until the first Monday in April, and does not expire on the last Monday in February. . Motion to amend findings of fact by making them more specific, and by striking out certain conclusions of law' stated as findings of fact proper. The motion was made in an action at law arising under the Tucker act, hi which plaintiff seeks to recover certain deposits from the United States. The facts constituting the cause of action appear more fully in a subsequent decision in this case in the circuit court of appeals, reported as U. S. v. Coudert, 19 C. C. A. 543, 73 Fed. 505. Findings of fact were signed by the circuit court and filed on October 24, 1894, and judgment entered against, the United States on November 5. 1894. On Mareli 15, 1895, this motion was made by the United States, on affidavits, to amend these findings of fact. Nolice of the motion liad been first given to the adverse side on March 5, 1895. It was contended by the United States that tile motion was made during the same term at which judgment was entered, and that the motion, therefore, was not too late, as the October, 1894, term for the trial of actions at law in the circuit court for the Southern district, under Ley. St. § 658, does not expire until the first Monday in April, 1895. Wallace Macfarlane, U. S. Atty., and Max J. Kohler, Asst. U. S. Atty., tor the motion. Joseph Kling, opposed. [MAJORITY — LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.] LACOMBE, Circuit Judge. The October jury term in this court lasts until the ensuing April term. Jones v. Navigation Co., 11 Blatchf. 406, Fed. Cas. No. 7,485. The motion was therefore in time, and there seems no sound objection to the amendments proposed, which only make the findings more detailed, and conformed strictly to the proofs. The findings are amended as prayed.