
    Potter vs. Eaton, impleaded, etc.
    
      Form of Judgment.
    
    Where the record in a cause, after reciting the trial and verdict, proceeds “ Therefore it is considered and adjudged by the court that the plaintiff in this action have judgment,” etc. : Held, that this was a judgment, and not merely an order for judgment; and the court did. not err in refusing to set aside the docketing thereof, and subsequent proceedings thereon, on the ground that there was no judgment.
    APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Fond du Lac County.
    The record in this action, after reciting the verdict of the jury, proceeds : “ Therefore it is considered and adjudged by the court that the plaintiff in this action have judgment against Wm. R. Tallmadge, R. P. Eaton, and Grier Tallmadge, the defendants, for the sum of $226.45 for his said damages on his said action, and the sum of $35.55 for his costs and disbursements, and that he have execution therefor.” [Signed by the clerk.] Afterwards a judgment for the amounts stated was docketed, and execution issued against Eaton; and he applied to have the docketing and all subsequent proceedings set aside, on the ground that no judgment had ever been entered. The court denied the motion; and Eaton appealed.
    
      R. P. Eaton, appellant, in person,
    contended that execution cannot issue until judgment is entered and docketed (R. S. ch. 132, secs. 34, 36); and that the entry above recited is of an order for judgment, and not of a judgment. R. S. 1849, ch. 4, sec. 1, subd. 1; R. S. 1858, ch. 5, sec. 1, subd. 1; 1 Chand. 22; 11 Wis. 91; 3 id. 363, 364; 6 id, 588. '
    
      E. S. Bragg, for respondent.
   Dixon, C. J.

The words have judgment,” in the entry here, are equivalent to “ hereby have judgment,” or “ recover,” as found in the same connection in ordinary entries or forms of judgment. After reciting the trial and verdict, the record proceeds: “ Therefore, it is considered and adjudged by the court, that the plaintiff in this action have judgment,” etc. This is a judgment, and not an order for a judgment as the appellant contends; and this being the only question, it follows that the order of the court below, refusing to set aside the docketing and all subsequent proceedings, must be affirmed.

By the Court. — Order affirmed.  