Case ID: miss_106/html/0506-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Smith, C. J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Charles Brooks & Co. v. W. L. Gentry.
    [64 South. 214.]
    Courts. Stenographers. Notes of evidence. Supreme court. Preparation 'of records.
    
    The supreme court has no control over the stenographers employed in the courts below. Neither is it charged with the duty of aiding litigants in making up bills of exceptions. All that it can do in this connection is to review the action of the courts below relative thereto.
    Appeal from the circuit court of Leflore county.
    Hon. Frank E. Everett, Judge.
    Suit by Charles Brooks & Company against W. L. Gentry. On motion for an order in the supreme court requiring the stenographers to transcribe and file his notes, or in the alternative to stand committed for contempt to the supreme court.
    The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
    No counsel of record.
   Smith, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a motion alleging that the stenographer in the court below has failed to transcribe and-file his notes of the evidence introduced on the trial of the case, and praying for an order directing him to do so “within ten days; . . . otherwise to stand in contempt of the supreme court. ’ ’

This court has no control over the stenographers employed in the courts below. Neither is it charged with the duty of aiding litigants in making up bills of exceptions. All that it can do in this connection is to review the action of the courts below relative thereto.

Motion overruled.