Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

37 Ind. 240

Rettig v. Pefferman

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1871

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1871-11-15

<p>Practice.—Bill of Exceptions.—Where there is no bill of exceptions in the record, and the reasons for a new trial are that the finding is contrary to law, and that the finding is contrary to evidence, such reasons cannot be examined by this court on appeal.</p>

Decided 1871-11-15

Pettit, J.

¶1The errors assigned in the case are, first, the *241court erred in its finding and, judgment; second, the court erred in refusing the appellanta new trial.

E. T. Dickey, for appellant.N. O. Ross ánd R. P. Effinger, for appellees.

¶2There was a motion for a new trial for the following reasons: first, the finding of the court is contrary to law; second, the finding of the court is contrary to the evidence.

¶3The judgment of the court was for $110 for the appellees, and sixty days were given to . file a bill of exceptions and appeal bond, neither of which is in the transcript; and as no question is raised on the pleadings, and as the evidence is not in the record by bill of exceptions, we cannot say that the court below committed any error, but must presume its action was right.

¶4The judgment is affirmed, with ten per cent, damages- and costs.,

/37/ind/240 · .json · Public domain