Suchocki v. Calumet Insurance
Suchocki v. Calumet Insurance
Opinion of the Court
This is a motion made by the appellee to compel the plaintiff and appellant to add to the return to the writ of error and to the printed record a bill of sale, copy of which is attached to the motion. In the court below a verdict was directed for the defendant. It was directed because the bill of sale in question had been given by the plaintiff and his wife after the policy was issued, and before the fire; it being a conveyance of some of the insured property to secure the payment of a loan. When the bill of exceptions was presented for settlement, counsel for appellee objected to its settlement unless the bill of sale was included. Counsel for both parties were heard upon the subject, and the circuit judge refused to sign the bill of exceptions unless said bill of sale was incorporated therein. Thereupon counsel for the appellant agreed to incorporate the bill of sale in the bill of exceptions, relying upon which the circuit judge, in his certificate to the bill of exceptions, employed the words:
The merits of the case are not before us. We are satisfied that the bill of exceptions returned to this court and printed is not the bill of exceptions which the circuit judge settled. We are satisfied, also, that counsel for the appellant understood that in using the term “ Exhibit D” in the certificate to the bill of exceptions the court meant, not the affidavit alone, but the affidavit and the bill of sale to which it was attached.
The motion is granted, with costs.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- SUCHOCKI v. CALUMET INSURANCE CO.
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published