Second District, Division 4 Has a Good Discussion of the Difference Between “Clerical” and “Judicial” Error in Corrected Judgment Context.
Here is an arcane one, but one that does arise every so often.
In Lee v. H. Rauvel, Inc., Case No. B205454 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Sept. 25, 2009) (unpublished), the lower court “waffled” on the issue of which side was the prevailing party for purposes of a routine costs award. Original winner (on appeal, the losing party) sought review, arguing that the corrected judgment was infirm because it dealt with judicial rather than clerical error.
The Court of Appeal agreed that judicial error occurred and that the trial court incorrectly entered a modified judgment on substantive bases.
No small reversal, because each side sought costs (including prejudgment interest) of between $52,101-$55,031. The opinion is must reading for anyone wanting to know the difference between “judicial” versus “clerical” error in the modified judgment context.