Case Name: MURRIN v. ULLMAN
Court: Supreme Court of Wyoming
Jurisdiction: Wyoming
Decision Date: 1871-07
Citations: 1 Wyo. 36
Docket Number: 
Parties: MURRIN v. ULLMAN.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wyoming Reports
Volume: 1
Pages: 36–36

Head Matter:
MURRIN v. ULLMAN.
Practice — Writs on Error. — Under the provisions of the Wyoming code of procedure and the rules of practice established by the supreme court, parties intending to have the case reviewed in the supreme court, either by writ of error or petition in error, must, upon the trial, make his objections clearly and distinctly, briefly stating the grounds thereof. If overruled, an exception must be noted then and there.
Bill oj? Exceptions. — After a motion for a new trial has been made and overruled by the court below, and an exception taken'thereto, such party must have his bill containing all exceptions, together with the motion for a new trial, signed or allowed by the presiding judge of the court below.
Idem. — If the plaintiff in error has not proceeded in accordance with the foregoing rules, it is correct practice for the defendant in error to move the court to dismiss the proceedings in error.
Sureties — Judgment.—Judgment may be entered against the sureties on a supersedeas bond in proceedings in error, without bringing suit thereon.
Error to the First District Court for Laramie County.
This cause came up from the district court on a writ of error, and what was termed a “ transcript;” such transcript neither showing that any motion for a new trial had been made in the court below and overruled, nor that any bill of exceptions had been signed, nor in fact that any exceptions had been properly taken. The attorney for the defendant in error moved to dismiss the proceedings in error, “ because the record does not disclose that any error of law occurred during the trial of said cause in the court below, to which the plaintiff in error excepted at the time.” Said attorney also moved the court to affirm the decision of the district court, and to order judgment against the plaintiff in error and his sureties.
Ihomas J. Street, for plaintiff in error.
Daniel McLaughlin, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
Both motions being granted, the proceedings in error avere dismissed and the decision of the district court affirmed.