Summary

Owen J. Roberts United States v. Hark — Opinion of the Court

The practice in federal courts doubtless varies because of the natural tendency to follow local state practice. Unaided by statute or rule of court we must decide on the bare record before us what constitutes the decision or judgment of the court below from which appeal must be taken within thirty days after rendition.
In view of the diverse practice and custom in District Courts we cannot lay down any hard and fast rule. Where, as here, a formal judgment is signed by the judge, this is prima facie the decision or judgment rather than a statement in an opinion or a docket entry.
Source: Wikisource

Owen J. Roberts United States v. Hark — Opinion of the Court

In the absence of anything of record to lead to a contrary conclusion, we take the formal order of March 31 as in fact and in law the pronouncement of the court's judgment and as fixing the date from which the time for appeal ran.
Second. This appeal is authorized by the Criminal Appeals Act. That Act permits a direct appeal to this court, inter alia, from a judgment of a District Court 'sustaining a special plea in bar.' The material question is not how the defendant's pleading is styled but the effect of the ruling sought to be reviewed
Source: Wikisource

Owen J. Roberts United States v. Hark — Opinion of the Court

After hearing arguments of counsel for the defendant and of the United States Attorney, it is↑ The words 'decision' and 'judgment' as used in the Act are not intended to describe two judicial acts, but a single act described in alternative phrases. Cf. Ex parte Tiffany, 252 U.S. 32, 36, 40 S.Ct. 239, 240, 64 L.Ed. 443.↑ There is no dispute that the entry of March 5, 'Indictment quashed', was in fact not placed upon the docket for a number of days after March 5, but it was made before March 29.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature