Blake v. Atl. Nat. Bank

• Citation: 80 A. 181,33 R.I. 109
• Parties: BLAKE v. ATLANTIC NAT. BANK.
• Decision Date: 07 July 1911
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Rhode Island

80 A. 181

33 R.I. 109

BLAKE

v. ATLANTIC NAT. BANK.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

July 7, 1911.

Blodgett, J., dissenting.

Action by Charles E. Blake, trustee in bankruptcy, against the Atlantic National Bank. To a decision for plaintiff, defendant excepts. Motion to dismiss bill of exceptions denied and dismissed.

Gardner, Pirce & Thornley (Charles R. Haslam, of counsel), for plaintiff.

John S. Murdock and Percy W. Gardner, for defendant.

SWEETLAND, J. The plaintiff is the trustee in bankruptcy of a bankrupt copartnership. The plaintiff alleges that said copartnership before its bankruptcy pledged with the defendant certain shares of stock and a bond as collateral security for a loan made by it to the copartnership; that the defendant sold said collateral security to satisfy the indebtedness; that, after deducting from the proceeds of the sale the amount of the loan, it now holds a balance in its hands, which it should pay over to the plaintiff. The proceeding is an action of the case brought to recover said balance.

Jury trial having been waived, the case was tried in the superior court before the Presiding Justice. At a day subsequent to the date of hearing the said justice filed a rescript in the nature of the decision provided for in the statute in cases tried before a justice sitting without a jury. In this rescript the justice, after briefly considering the facts of the case and the question of law which in his opinion were involved, gave "decision for the plaintiff for the amount of the balance shown to be remaining in the hands of said defendant." To this decision the defendant excepted. Within the time fixed by law after filing a transcript of the evidence, the defendant filed its bill of exceptions, in which it states no exception save the one taken to the decision. In this bill of exceptions the defendant recites the title of the case, the name of the justice before whom it was tried, and the date of the trial, and then states that "upon the 10th day of May, 1910, the court gave its decision in said cause for the plaintiff for the amount of the balance shown to be remaining in the hands of said defendant, to which decision the defendant duly excepted." The defendant then prays that its bill of exceptions may be allowed by the court according to the statute.

The case is now before us upon the plaintiff's motion to dismiss the bill of exceptions, on the grounds that the said defendant failed to comply with section 17 of chapter 298, General Laws 1909, in that the said bill of exceptions does not state separately and clearly the exceptions taken by the said defendant to said decision of the superior court and now relied upon by said defendant, and that the statement of the exception in said bill of exceptions is too general and indefinite.

Section 8, c. 298, Gen. Laws 1909, provides, among other things, that any party to a civil action heard on its merits by the superior court without a jury, aggrieved by the decision of the court, may except thereto. The statute does not prescribe any particular form for this exception, nor does it require that the party excepting shall embody in his exception the grounds of his objection to the decision. He has sufficiently complied with the statute if he brings upon the record in some formal way the fact that he objects to the decision.

Section 17, c. 298, Gen. Laws 1909, provides, among other things, that within the time prescribed by law the party prosecuting exceptions shall file in the superior court "his bill of exceptions, in which he shall state separately and clearly the exceptions relied upon." In the progress of a cause in the superior court from its entry until final decision or verdict a party may take many exceptions, some of which, upon more deliberate consideration he abandons. The requirement of the statute is that he shall compile those upon which he has decided to rely and that he shall set them out separately and clearly. This constitutes his bill of exceptions, which is the basis of his proceeding in this court of review. Its purpose is not to require the excepting party to elaborate his exceptions, to set forth the reasons for his allegations of error, or to outline the argument which he intends to make before this court.

For convenience and in the furtherance of orderly procedure the party is required to collect from all parts of the record, and bring together in one paper, the precise exceptions which he has taken in the travel of the case, and upon which he now wishes to stand. Some misconception has arisen in the interpretation of the requirement that he shall state his exceptions separately and clearly. It is to be noted that it is the exceptions themselves which are to be stated separately and clearly, not the reasons upon which the party bases his claim of error. A party has...