Case ID: la_6/html/0123-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mathews, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

THOMASSON vs. BAUM.
    APPEAL FROM THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT.
    Where the record contains no statement of facts, and the certificate of the clerk shows that the testimony taken in open court was not reduced to writing, the case cannot he examined on its merits in the Supreme Court.
    This action was brought against the defendant as acceptor of the following bill of exchange:
    “ Louisville, Nov. 20, 1832.
    Thirty days after date, pay Mr. W. P. Thomasson, or order, four hundred dollars, and place the same to your obt. servant.
    “ Signed, Dudr. Heinsake.
    
      “ Dr. Wm. Baum, present.”
    It was endorsed, “ accepted, payable as soon as convenient, Nov. 20, 1832. Dr. Wm. J. B. Baum.”
    The defendant denied his liability on the said bill, on the ground that the endorsement which he had made, did not constitute an acceptance of the bill.
    The case was submitted to a jury, who found a verdict for the plaintiff for the amount of the bill, with interest at six per centum per annum, from 20th of December, 1832, until payment. Judgment was entered for the amount of the bill with eight per centum interest, until payment.
    A motion for a new trial was overruled, and the defendant appealed.
    The judge, a quo, gave no certificate.
    The clerk’s certificate stated that the transcript contained all the proceedings, and all the documents filed, but was silent in regard to testimony adduced. The transcript mentioned the names of two witnesses of the plaintiff, but no statement was given of their testimony.
    
      Hennen, for appellee,
    moved to dismiss the appeal, because the evidence was not taken down at the trial, and no statement thereof has been made.
    Where the record contains no statement of facts, and the certificate oftheclerk shows that the testimony taken in open court was not reduced to writing, the case caunot be examined on its merits in the supreme court.
    Harrison, for defendant and appellant.
   Mathews, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

In this case a motion is made on the part of the appellee to dismiss the appeal, on the grounds that the record does not contain all the evidence on which the case was adjudged in the court below, and that no statement of facts was made out, as required by law. The record exhibits no statement of facts, and the certificate of the clerk shows that the testimony taken in open court, was not reduced to writing; under these circumstances, it is impossible for the appellate court to examime and decide the case on its merits.

It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the appeal he dismissed at the costs of the appellant.