
    HENRY BOHLEN, Respondent v. THE METROPOLITAN ELEVATED RAILWAY COMPANY, et al., Appellants.
    
    
      Findings of fact, irreconcilable of, cannot after judgment rendered be remedied by the judge icho made them on a motion made before him sitting at a term other than that at which the judgment was rendered.
    
    Before Sedgwick, Ch. J., and Dugro, J.
    
      Decided March 4, 1890.
    
      Appeal from an order made on the 9th day of December, 1889, at a special term held at chambers, opening a judgment rendered on June 6, 1889, at speciál equity term upon findings made on the said June 6th by the judge upon a trial before the court without a jury, and amending the findings nunc pro tunc. The order was made on the respondent’s motion and was granted by the judge who made the findings.
    
      Sackett & Bennett, for respondent.
    
      Davies & Bapallo, for appellants.
    
      
       Note.—The Court of Appeals on the 17th day of June, A. D. 1890, reversed the above decision. Thereafter, upon the authority of that decision of the Court of Appeals, the general term, on the 27th of June, 1890, affirmed a similar order made in the case of Charles Lippe, respondent v. The Metropolitan Elevated Railway Company, appellant, in which the same counsel were engaged.
    
   The court reversed the orders (Dugro, J., writing, and citing Rockwell v. Carpenter, 25 Hun, 529; McLean v. Stewart, 14 lb. 472 ; Gardiner v. Schwab, 34 lb. 583 ; Freeman on Judgments, §§ 70-101, Sedgwick, Ch. J., concurring), holding as stated in the head note.  