A final judgment had been entered in the action. Almost two years later, a motion was made in Supreme Court. The motion concerned claims arising out of the same transactions as the terminated action. Supreme Court entertained the motion, leading to this appeal.
Issue
Whether Supreme Court had jurisdiction to entertain a motion made almost two years after final judgment was entered. Also, whether claims arising out of the same transactions could be pursued after entry of final judgment.
Rule
A motion must be addressed to a pending action, and once final judgment is entered the action is terminated. After final judgment, all claims arising out of the same transactions are barred by res judicata.
🔒
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
In Albany, Nora Benton sued Lakeside Fabrication, LLC for breach of a supply agreement. The court entered final judgment for Lakeside, and 20 months later Nora filed a motion in the same action asking for additional damages tied to the same contract dealings.
How should the court rule on Nora's motion?
Explanation. A motion must be addressed to a pending action. Once final judgment is entered, the action is terminated, so the court is without jurisdiction to entertain a later motion in that action. Because Nora filed the motion long after final judgment and it concerns the same underlying transaction, the motion cannot be heard. (Derived from Kenford Co., Inc. v. County of Erie (n.d.).)