Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

42 Neb. 330

Koehler v. Summers

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided October 16, 1894

Nebraska Supreme Court · decided 1894-10-16

<p>Review: Transcript: Motion for New Trial: Assignments of Error. In order to^obtaln a review iu this court of matters occurring on the trial in the district court, it must appear that the errors complained of were called to the attention of the district court by a motion for a new trial. A record which discloses that a motion for a new trial was filed and overruled, but which does not disclose the grounds of such motion, is insufficient for this purpose.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently April 1899

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1894-10-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Irvine, C.

¶1All the errors assigned in this case relate to matters occurring upon the trial. None of these can be considered, for the reason that the record does not contain any motion for a new trial. It is true that the transcript shows that a motion for a new trial was filed and overruled; but in order to obtain a review in this court of matters occurring on the trial it is essential, not only that there should have been a motion for a new trial, but that the errors complained of should have been in that motion called to the attention of the district court. In the absence from the transcript of the motion for a new trial we cannot say, or presume, that the errors complained of were called to the-attention of the trial court.

¶2Judgment affirmed.

/42/neb/330 · .json · Public domain