Ward v. Sumner
Ward v. Sumner
Opinion of the Court
This is an action on a promissory note. Defendant prevailed in the trial court and plaintiff appealed.
Defendant contends that the bill of exceptions brought here by plaintiff should be disregarded, and that as there is no pretense of error save as to matter of exception during the trial, the judgment should be affirmed.
A remarkable length of time has elapsed since the appeal was granted which was more than two years ago, viz.: on December 28, 1898. Six successive extensions of time for filing a bill of exceptions were granted, the last one being to November 1, 1899; the case was then, on February 16, 1900, filed in this
In the abstract, as originally presented in this court, there did not appear any record entry of extensions of time for filing the bill and a supplemental or additional abstract was filed showing the record entries. This additional abstract shows that after the extension to October 16, 1899, the next entry was on October 25 extending the time to October 26. This discloses a break in the chain of extensions which is not allowable. The extension just mentioned, set down in the record as on October 25, should have been made prior to the expiration of the extension to October 16.
Again, there is no statement in the abstract by recitation or otherwise, that any judgment was rendered in the cause.
There being no bill of exceptions in the cause, we are left to consider the record proper and finding no error therein we affirm the judgment.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.