Brown v. Brown.
| Decision Date | 25 June 1887 |
| Citation | 29 W.Va. 777 |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
| Parties | Brown v. Brown. |
New Trial Motion for in Court Below Waiver.
Where exceptions are taken during the trial to the judgment of the court in giving or refusing to give instructions to the jury or in admitting or rejecting evidence, unless a motion is made in the trial-court to set aside the verdict, and that motion is overruled, the appellate court will regard such exceptions as waived and will not review the rulings.
Berkshire & Sturgiss for plaintiff in error.
Hagans de Mo re land for defendant in error.
Johnson, President:
This is an action of debt brought in the Circuit Court of Monongalia county in May, 1883. The defendant appeared and filed a general demurrer to the declaration, which was overruled; and defendant pleaded payment. The issue was on the 19th day of October, 1883, tried by a jury and a verdict rendered on the 23d day of October for the plaintiff for the sum of $778.34. Thereupon, as the record shows, judgment was suspended. On the 26th day of the same month the court entered judgment on the verdict. The entry on the record further states, that uon motion of defendant execution on this judgment is suspended for forty days to enable him to apply for an appeal" &c. Then there appears a memorandum, that on the trial of the case the defendant excepted to three several opinions of the court and tendered three several bills of exceptions, which were signed, sealed and made part of the record.
The first bill of exceptions was to the refusal to give an instruction asked by defendant; the second to the giving of an instruction asked by the plaintiff; the third to the refusal of certain evidence offered by the defendant. No motion was made to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial. To the judgment of the court the defendant obtained a writ of error. The only errors assigned are those taken and saved by the defendant on the trial, as set forth in said several bills of exceptions. He demurred to the declaration; but he has not insisted, that the court erred in overruling his demurrer. However, if error appeared in this action of the court, he should here have the benefit of it; but the declaration was in the usual form; and the demurrer was properly overruled. This Court held in State v. Phares, 24 W. Va. 657, that in a case tried by a jury, no matter how many exceptions are taken to rulings of the court made during, the trial, unless a motion is...
To continue reading
Request your trial