Case Name: PALMER v. CASE PLOW WORKS CO.
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1925-11-02
Citations: 3 Ohio Law Abs. 716
Docket Number: No. 359
Parties: PALMER v. CASE PLOW WORKS CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 3
Pages: 716–716

Head Matter:
No. 944
PALMER v. CASE PLOW WORKS CO.
Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist., Wood Co.
No. 359.
Decided Nov. 2, 1925
148. BILL OF EXCEPTIONS—Court must certify that it contains all the evidence of the trial before Court of Appeals can consider review of case.
Attorneys—E. V. Bope & Riegle and Cheney for Palmer; N. R. Harrington for Company; all of Bowling Green.

Opinion:
WILLIAM, J.
J. C. Palmer in this case claims that the court below erred in directing a verdict for the J. I. Case Plow Works Co. As there is no certificate of the trial judge setting out that the. bill of exceptions contains all the evidence, this court cannot consider the question raised as to whether or not the court erred in so ruling. Regan, Admx. vs. McHugh, 78. Ohio' St., 326.
It does not appear from the record that there was any other error in the proceedings. The judgment will therefore be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.