Case Name: Amanda Parsons and Halsted H. Hoeg, Appellants, vs. Martha B. Baxter, Appellee
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1869
Citations: 13 Fla. 580
Docket Number: 
Parties: Amanda Parsons and Halsted H. Hoeg, Appellants, vs. Martha B. Baxter, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 13
Pages: 580–580

Head Matter:
Amanda Parsons and Halsted H. Hoeg, Appellants, vs. Martha B. Baxter, Appellee.
Wiiere the bill of exceptions contains none of the evidence, nor an indication of the state of the facts upon which the Circuit Judge was asked to charge, nor any part of the charge of the Court, the judgment appealed from being conformable to the pleadings, no error is apparent in the record and the judgment must be affirmed.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.
F. 1. Wheaton and B. B. Andrews for Appellants.
Sanderson and FEngle for Appellee.

Opinion:
EAHDALL, C. J.,
delivered the opinion of the coutt.
Assumpsit commenced in Duval Circuit Court by Martha B. Baxter, appellee, against appellants, and judgment rendered against them Mov. 29th, 1869, for $1,772.53.
There is no assignment of errors filed in this case, as required by the rules.
The error mentioned in the brief is that " the court refused to charge the jury touching the remission of interest during the absence of the plaintiff from the country and the absence of the instrument sued on, the plaintiff having no authorized agent here to receive payment, as asked for by counsel for defendants."
The bill of exceptions contains none of the evidence -whatever, nor any indication of the state of the facts upon which the court was asked to charge, nor does it contain any part of the charge of the court. The judgment is conformable the declaration in the suit, and as there is nothing before us showing whether an error was committed or not, the presumption is there was none.
There being no error apparent in the record, the judgment is affirmed.