Gassenheimer Paper Co. v. Marietta Paper Mfg. Co.

• Decision Date: 15 May 1900
• Citation: 28 So. 564,127 Ala. 183
• Parties: GASSENHEIMER PAPER CO. v. MARIETTA PAPER MFG. CO.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

28 So. 564

127 Ala. 183

GASSENHEIMER PAPER CO. v. MARIETTA PAPER MFG. CO.

Supreme Court of Alabama

May 15, 1900

Appeal from city court of Montgomery; A. D. Sayre, Judge.

Action by the Marietta Paper Manufacturing Company against the Gassenheimer Paper Company. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Graham & Steiner, for appellant.

Lomax Crum & Weil and W. W. Pearson, for appellee.

McCLELLAN C.J.

Action of trover by the Marietta Paper Manufacturing Company against the Gassenheimer Paper Company. There were a jury, and a verdict for the plaintiff, and from the judgment thereon the defendant appeals to this court. There was a stenographic report of the trial in the city court. That report, written out in full, and signed by the presiding judge, has been dumped upon us as and for a bill of exceptions, in the most palpable and flagrant violation of rule 33 of circuit and inferior court practice (Code, p. 1201), prescribing the frame, and in a general way the contents, of bills of exceptions. The paper which is copied into this transcript as a bill of exceptions contains a statement of everything that was done on the trial, and sets forth every word uttered by everybody-witnesses, attorneys, judge, etc.-while it was in progress, except arguments of counsel to the jury, and a part of the general charge given ex mero motu by the court. No effort is made to present a statement of the testimony or its tendencies, as the rule requires, but it is given verbatim as it comes from the mouths of witnesses, with burdensome iteration and repetition. Not only are the objections to testimony stated, but the arguments of counsel upon the objections are set forth at length and in full; and not only are shown the rulings of the court, but every remark of the presiding judge is set out with care and particularity. Not content with setting forth rulings against the defendant, who appeals, and his exceptions, every ruling against the plaintiff, who was successful, and of course does not appeal is set down, as also the grounds upon which such ruling was made, and the plaintiff's exception thereto, along with the suggestions, remarks, and arguments of counsel thereon. The result is that we have here a conglomeration of matter covering more than 70 closely and badly typewritten pages through which we are asked to grope to get at the points reserved for our consideration, all which might easily...