Cooney v. American Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Elkhart

• Decision Date: 25 June 1903
• Citation: 67 N.E. 989,161 Ind. 193
• Parties: COONEY v. AMERICAN MUT. LIFE INS. CO. OF ELKHART.
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

161 Ind. 193

67 N.E. 989

COONEY

v.AMERICAN MUT. LIFE INS. CO. OF ELKHART.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

June 25, 1903.

Appeal from Circuit Court, St. Joseph County; W. A. Funk, Judge.

Action by James Cooney against the American Mutual Life Insurance Company of Elkhart. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Transferred from the Appellate Court under section 1337u, Burns' Rev. St. 1901. Affirmed.

R. M. Johnson, Robert Lowry, and James D. Osborne, for appellant. Van Fleet & Van Fleet, for appellee.

HADLEY, J.

Suit by appellant on a judgment which he claims to have recovered against the appellee in the state of New York. Issues were formed, and the case submitted to the court for trial. Upon proper request the court made a special finding of facts, and stated its conclusion of law thereupon in favor of appellee. The only error assigned is that the court erred in its conclusion of law.

The first contention is that appellant took no valid exception to the conclusion of law, and hence has brought up no question for the consideration of this court. The record of the special finding and conclusion of law is silent as to any objection or exception thereto by either party, but next following the signature of the judge to the conclusion of law the transcript proceeds: “And thereupon comes the plaintiff, and files his bill of exceptions to the said conclusions of law by the court, and the same is ordered filed by the clerk, and made a part of the record in this cause, and is in the words and figures following, to wit.” Then follows what purports to be a formal bill of exceptions, which sets forth the conclusion of law, and alleges that appellant, at the time the conclusion of law was found and entered by the court, excepted thereto. Have we the power, under this record, to take cognizance of an exception to the conclusion of law? Section 560, Burns' Rev. St. 1901, provides that, when a party desires to except to the court's view of the law as applicable to the facts in the case, upon his request the court is required to state the facts in writing, and then the conclusions of law upon them. This requirement makes the special finding and conclusions of law a part of the record proper, which, upon its face, discloses whatever infirmity may exist in the court's legal conclusions, or in its application of the law to the facts found. With respect to preserving objections and exceptions arising from such records, section 640 provides as follows: ...