Case ID: ohio-law-abs_54/html/0128-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By THE COURT:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

GARLAND, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GILBERT, Defendants-Appellants.
    Ohio Appeals, Second District, Montgomery County.
    No. 2029.
    Decided February 18, 1949.
    I. C. Delscamp, Dayton, for plaintiff-appellee.
    W. H.’Earley, Eaton, C. A. Funkhouser, Baggott & Johnston, Dayton, for defendants-appellants.
   OPINION

By THE COURT:

Submitted on motion of plaintiff-appellee to affirm the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas on the ground that no Bill of Exceptions has been filed within 40 days after the overruling of the motion for new trial.

A Bill of Exceptions is not required to review alleged errors appearing on the face of the record. Sec. 11564 GC. From the record it appears that the errors complained of may be exemplified without a Bill of Exceptions.

Motion overruled.

MILLER, PJ, HORNBECK and WISEMAN, JJ, concur.