Case ID: colo_2/html/0552-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Wells, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Daniels et al. v. The City of Denver.
    Pbactice— of the manner of tendering exceptions. It is not sufficient to file a bill of exceptions in the office of the clerk of the court, within the time allowed for tendering the same. It must be presented to the judge who presided at the trial.
    
      Error to District Court, Arapahoe County.
    
    The issue joined in the court below was tried at the April term, 1874, and time was given to tender a bill of exceptions. At the expiration, of the time allowed for this purpose, and for some time previous, the judge of the court was in Park, holding the term of the district court of that county. On the day preceding the expiration of the rule, the plaintiff in error deposited the bill of exceptions in the office of the clerk of the court, and the bill was subsequently allowed and sealed.
    Patterson, for defendant in error,
    now moves to strike the bill of exceptions from the record.
    N. Harrison and E. L. Smith, contra.
    
   Wells, J.

We are all agreed that the absence of the judge from the county was no excuse for the omission to tender the bill of exceptions within the day limited.

Whatever rule shall be prescribed must be a general one. To allow the excuse which is set up here would, as to those counties in which the court sits but once, annually, have the effect to enable parties to defer the settlement of the bill of exceptions beyond all memory of the occurrence of the trial.

Motion sustained.