Case ID: miss_23/html/0507-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per cwriam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John Stephenson vs. A. W. Smith & Co.
    This court cannot look beyond the record to know the facts of the case, and unless it appear from the record that the exceptions taken on the trial were allowed, signed, sealed, and made a part of the record, we cannot notice them. Held, that the bill of exceptions in this case was not sealed, and it does not appear that it was made a part of the record in this case.
    In error from the circuit court of Monroe county; Hon, F. M. Rogers, judge.
    The ppinion of the court contains a sufficient statement of the facts of the case.
    
      Lindsey & Coop, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Herbert, for defendant in error.
   Per cwriam.

Stephenson sued Smith as drawer of a bill of exchange. A verdict was found for the defendants and a motion made for a new trial, which was overruled. Whether the court erred or not in overruling such motion, we cannot decide from the record before us. The statute which authorizes a writ of error from the refusal of the court to grant a new trial, provides, that the party who conceives the decision contrary to law, may except to the opinion, and reduce the reasons for such new trial, &c., to writing, and it shall be the duty of the judge before whom such motion is made, to allow, sign and seal the same, and to make said bill of exceptions a part of the record in said cause.” Hutch. Code, 885.

Unless it appear from the record, that the exceptions so taken were allowed, signed, and sealed, and made a part of the record, we cannot notice them. That was not done in this case. The bill of exceptions in this case was not sealed, and it does not appear that it was made by the circuit court a part of the record in the cause.

Let the judgment be affirmed.