
    Charles E. Bullard et al., App’lts, v. Mary C. Harris, Impl’d, Resp't
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, Third Department,
    
    
      Filed November 22, 1892.)
    OOSTS—J UDGMENT.
    Respondent was joined with others as defendant in an action to set aside a chattel mortgage held by her. She appeared by a separate attorney, put in a separate answer, and made separate requests to find, which were found, and costs were awarded to her. She entered up judgment for costs without filing a formal decision embracing the findings. Held, that while this was not good practice, plaintiffs were not harmed as the facts and conclusions found by the court were a part of the record.
    Appeal from order denying motion to set aside judgment entered in favor of defendant for costs.
    The judgment was entered in the action of Bullard v. Kenyon et al., ante, in which this defendant was made a defendant as the mortgagee.
    
      E. G. Bullard, (E. F. Bullard, of counsel), for app’lts; John H. Benedict, (William H. McCall, of counsel), for resp’ts.
   Herrick, J.

The respondent, Mary C. Harris, was joined with others as defendant; her interests were not entirely the same as those of the other defendants; she appeared by her own attorney, she put in a separate answer, and upon the trial separate requests to find were proposed in her behalf and found by the court, and the court awarded her costs.

Upon those findings of the court she has entered up a judgment for costs, but has not written out and filed a formal decision embracing the findings of the court. While the course pursued is not good practice, still the facts and conclusions of law found by the court are made a part of the record; everything really essential is there; no injustice is done to the plaintiff by the procedure adopted, and I can see no reason why the judgment should be set aside.

Let the order of the special term be affirmed, with ten dollars costs, and printing and other disbursements.

Mayham, P. J., and Putnam, J., concur.  