Case Name: Soup v. Smith
Court: Iowa Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Iowa
Decision Date: 1868-01-29
Citations: 26 Iowa 472
Docket Number: 
Parties: Soup v. Smith.
Judges: 
Reporter: Iowa Reports
Volume: 26
Pages: 472–473

Head Matter:
Soup v. Smith.
Practice: failure to except. The Supreme Court will not review an order of the District Court unless excepted to by the party complaining.
Appeal from Hamilton District Court.
Friday, January 29..
Costs : motion : appeal : exception. — Action by plaintiff before a justice on a lease, alleging breaches. Defense in denial, and a cross action on the attachment bond filed by the plaintiff. Plaintiff had judgment before the justice, and the defendant appealed to the District Court. On a trial in the latter court, the jury returned a general verdict for the defendant for fifty cents. They also found specially that the attachment was wrongfully sued out, but not maliciously; also, that defendant was entitled to recover damages therefor, but did not fix the amount. There were no other special findings. The District Court rendered judgment on these findings in favor of the defendant for fifty cents damages, and ordered that each party pay one-half of the costs, and gave judgment accordingly. From this judgment in relation to eosts ' the defendant appeals.
C. A. Ola/ric for the appellant.
D. JD. Miracle and Bradley c& Caswell for the appellee.

Opinion:
Dillon, Ch. J.-
-The court adjudged that the defendant, though he had a general verdict in his favor, should recover but one-half of his costs. To this judgment the record discloses no exception, and for this reason, the appellee insists that no question is presented which this court can review.
As the point is well made, it must be sustained. On examination of the record, we find that not only was there no exception to the order or judgment as to the costs, but no question in relation thereto was made by motion or otherwise.
Inasmuch as the court ordered that the defendant should recover but one-half of the costs, and entered judgment accordingly, it may be that no motion to retax would be necessary, but if not, the record, in order to give the appellant.^ standing in this court, should show that he excepted to 'the order or judgment of which he complains. Bev. § 3106, 3107, 3108; and see cases collected, 2 Iowa Dig. 124.
Affirmed.