Mitchell v. Mackey-Nisbit Co.

Decided March 3, 1897

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1897-03-03

<p>1. Practice—Rulings Must be Objected to and Exceptions Taken if They are to be Questioned on Appeal.—Where the bill of exceptions does not show that the court held, or refused to hold, any proposition of law, or that any motion for a new trial, or in arrest of judgment was made, or that any exception was taken to the judgment or finding of the court, the judgment must be affirmed on appeal. And an exception to a judgment in the judgment order is the same as no exception at all.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently August 1898

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1897-03-03

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Justice Scofield

¶1delivered the opinion of the Court.

¶2The records in these two cases are essentially the same except' as to the amounts recovered.

¶3Each case was tried by the court without a jury.

¶4In neither case does the bill of exceptions show that the court was requested to hold, or did hold or refuse, any proposition of law, or that any motion for a new trial or in arrest of judgment was made, or that any exception was taken to the findings or judgment of the court. An exception to the judgment in the judgment order, but not in the bill of exceptions, is the same as no exception at all.

¶5There is but one exception on the part of appellants to the rulings of the court as to the admissibility of evidence, and that is concerning a matter which in no manner affects the decision of the cases.

¶6There being no question before us for consideration, the judgment in each of these cases is affirmed.