Case ID: ky_67/html/0046-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "JUDGE PETERS", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CASE 13-PETITION ORDINARY
    SEPTEMBER 29.
    Detherage vs. Montgomery.
    APPEAL PROM SHELBY CIRCUIT COURT.
    
      Motion for a new trial in the circuit court is essential in an action wherein the issue presented by the pleadings was submitted to a jury. The failure to make such motion precludes the appellant from the opportunity of having the errors complained of corrected in the Court of Appeals. [Humphreys vs. Walton, 2 Bush, 580.)
    J. W. Middleton and J. L. Caldwell, For Appellant,
    CITED—
    1 Greenleaf on Evidence, secs. 390, 394, 397.
    2 Met., 613 ; Millet vs. Parker.
    
    Bullock & Davis, For Appellee.
   JUDGE PETERS

delivered the opinion oe the court:

The issue presented by the pleadings was submitted to a jury, and after the rendition of a verdict, and judgment thereon, no motion was made for a new trial, but an appeal by the defendant below was prayed to this court, and time obtained to make out and have allowed a bill of exceptions.

In Humphreys vs. Walton, 2 Bush, 580, this court said : “ On an issue, and trial of a fact by a jury, a motion for a new trial is essential to correct the errors growing out of the evidence or instructions, before an appeal can be entertained by this court:”

The failure, therefore, of appellant to move for a new trial in the court below, to have the errors complained of corrected, precludes him from the opportunity of having them corrected here.

Wherefore, the judgment must be affirmed.