Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

16 Ill. 138

McCormick v. Gray

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1854

Illinois Supreme Court · decided 1854-12-15

<p>ERROR TO MORGAN.</p> <p>When the refusal to grant a new trial is assigned, as a reason for the reversal of a judgment, the bill of exceptions should state the whole of the testimony.</p>

Decided 1854-12-15

Treat, C. J.

¶1Gray brought an action against McCormick, and obtained a verdict therein. The court overruled a motion for a new trial, and rendered judgment on the verdict. The refusal to grant a new trial, is now assigned for error. The bill of exceptions does not profess to contain all of the evidence adduced on the trial. We therefore cannot inquire into the propriety of the decision. It should appear* on the face of the bill of exceptions, that the whole of the testimony is incorporated. In the absence of such a statement, the presumption is, that the evidence authorized the verdict. See Clark v. Willis, ante, 61.

¶2The judgment must bo affirmed.

¶3Judgment affirmed.

/16/ill/138 · .json · Public domain