Case ID: f_83/html/0675-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURTAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

FOURTH NAT. BANK OF ST. LOUIS, MO., v. CITY OF BELLEVILLE, ILL.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
    November 18, 1897.)
    No. 413.
    Review on Error — Case Tried to the Court Without a Jury.
    An assignment of error upon a general finding made by the court in an action at law, tried without a jury, raises no question for review.
    In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Illinois.
    This was an action at law by the Fourth National Bank of St. Louis, Mo., against the city of Belleville, 111., to recover on 13 railway aid bonds issued by that city. The case was tried to the court, a jury being waived by stipulation in writing, and the court found the issues for defendant, and entered judgment; accordingly. To review that judgment, the plaintiff sued out this writ of error.
    Gl. A. Koerner, for plaintiff in error.
    J. M. Hamill, for defendant in error.
    Before WOODS, JENKINS, and SHOWALTER, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURTAM.

This was a suit at law, which, upon written stipulation of the parties, was tried by the court, without the intervention of a jury. The court found generally in favor of the defendant, the city of Belleville, and judgment was thereupon rendered in its favor. There was no special finding of facts and no statement of conclusions of law. Error is assigned only upon the general finding of the court. There is, therefore, nothing for this court to review. Martinton v Fairbanks, 112 U. S. 670, 5 Sup. Ct. 321; Boardman v. Toffey, 117 U. S. 271, 6 Sup. Ct. 734; Jenks’ Adm’r v. Stapp, 9 U. S. App. 34, 3 C. C. A. 244, and 52 Fed. 641; Skinner v. Franklin Co., 9 U. S. App. 676, 6 C. C. A. 118, and 56 Fed. 783; Distilling & Cattle Feeding Co. v. Gottschalk Co., 21 U. S. App. 638, 13 C. C. A. 618, and 66 Fed. 609; Phipps v. Harding, 34 U. S. App. 148, 17 C. C. A. 203, and 70 Fed. 468; Woodbury v. City of Shawneetown. 31 U. S. App. 655, 20 C. C. A. 400, and 71 Fed. 205; Seymour v. White Co., 31 U. S. App. 658, 20 C. C. A. 102, and 71 Fed. 207. The writ of error is dismissed.