Bieber v. Thoma

<p>Abstract of the Decision.</p> <p>1. Appeal and error, § 839*—hill of exceptions must he filed. Where a bill of exceptions has once been signed, the parties charged with presentation and filing thereof must file same within a reasonable length of time.</p> <p>2. Appeal and error, § 843*—what is purpose of section 81 of Practice Act. The provision in the Practice Act, sec. 81 (J. & A. If 8618), permitting another judge to sign the bill of exceptions, is only to provide for a contingency that might arise, for which neither of the parties is responsible,—the disability of the judge.</p> <p>3. Appeal and error, § 843*—ulhat showing necessary to permit signing of hill of exceptions hy another judge. The fact that the trial judge is physically disabled must affirmatively appear in the order, by virtue of which another judge under the Practice Act, sec. 81 (J. & A. jf 8618), signs a bill of exceptions nunc pro tunc.</p> <p>4. Appeal and error, § 843*—when signing of bill of exceptions by another judge unauthorized. The signing of a bill of exceptions and the ordering of the filing thereof as per day of presentation by a judge who did not try the case does not confer validity upon it, where the bill of exceptions was marked “presented” by the trial judge and filed without his signature with the clerk of court before the expiration of the time for filing, and there was nothing in the order of the second judge or in the record to show that the trial judge was unable to sign the bill of exceptions before it was filed with the clerk, or for five weeks after expiration of date of filing.</p>