Sartoris

The controversy underlying these appeals was decided by us in Sartoris v. Utah Construction Co. et al. (No. 5064) 21 F.(2d) 1 . As will be noted, the original judgment of dismissal was there reversed, “with instructions to enter a judgment upon the record as it stands, in favor of plaintiff [Sartoris] and against the railroad company [appellant here], for the reasonable cost of the extra work called for by the new plans, exclusive of the concrete, which has already been paid for, the cost to include a reasonable compensation for plaintiff’s superintendence, and dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint against the construction company, with appropriate disposition of the construction company’s counterclaim against plaintiff.” The mandate was filed in the court below on October 17, 1927, and on the same day, without notice to the railroad company, that court, upon motion of counsel for Sartoris, entered a judgment in his ravor and against the railroad company for $72,591.57, and against Sartoris in favor of the construction company, upon its counterclaim, for $66,591.57. On the following day written no *853 tice of the entry of the judgment was served upon the railroad…