Court Opinion

ID: 9828467
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 18:24:22.473114+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:48.791216
License: Public Domain

RAINEY, C. J.
Appellant brought this suit against appellees to recover $582 and also to foreclose a lien on the homestead of Royal Smith and wife, alleging that said amount was for lumber and material furnished for the erection of a residence. Fred Garvin-made default, and appellee Royal Smith answered and contested the allegations of appellant’s petition as to the personal liability of Royal Smith, and the foreclosure of the lien. A trial resulted in a judgment for appellant against Fred C. Garvin, contractor, to whom the materials were furnished, and in favor of Smith personally, and against the enforcement of a lien on the building. From this judgment this appeal is prosecuted.
[1, 2] The assignments presented by appellant all relate to the action of the court, the correctness of which depends upon the evidence adduced upon the trial of the cause. As there is no proper statement of facts found in the record from which we can determine the matters involved, the assignments cannot be intelligibly considered. With the record we find what purports to be an agreed statement of facts, with exhibits attached, used by the attorneys in the trial of the case, but the same shows no ap*562proval or certificate oí tile trial judge that it is correct; therefore the same in that condition cannot be looked to or considered by us.
Article 1949, R. S. 1911, provides for the use of an agreed statement in the trial after being signed by the parties and certified to by the court as correct, and article 2068 requires statements of facts on appeal to also show the approval of the trial judge. As the statement of facts here presented does not show the approval of the trial judge, the same will not be entertained by this court.
The judgment is affirmed.

<§=>For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Kev-Numbered Digests and Indexes