Young v. Pennsylvania Co.

Decision Date29 October 1889
Citation46 Ohio St. 558,24 N.E. 595
PartiesYOUNG, Treasurer, v. PENNSYLVANIA CO.
CourtOhio Supreme Court

Error to circuit court, Holmes county.

Rev. St. Ohio, § 6710, as amended by act May 4, 1885, is as follows: ‘ A judgment rendered, or final order made, by the circuit court, any court of common pleas, probate court, or the superior court of any city or county, may be reversed, vacated, or modified by the supreme court, on petition in error, for errors appearing on the record. But no petition in error, in such cases, except as to the judgment or final order of the circuit court, shall be filed without leave of the supreme court, or a judge thereof, and the supreme court shall not, in any civil cause or proceeding, except when its jurisdictional is original, be required to determine as to the weight of the evidence; and, on application of any party excepting to a ruling or decision of the circuit court during the trial, or on motion for a new trial, such court shall find from the evidence, and state on the record, the facts upon which the alleged error arises, or which may be material in determining whether error has intervened or not.’

Critchfield & Huston , for plaintiff in error.

Rush Taggart , for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

A finding of fact made by the circuit court from the evidence contained in a bill of exceptions in a case before it on error is not authorized by section 6710, Rev. St., as amended May 4, 1885, (82 Ohio Laws, 230,) and, if in fact made, will present no question that this court will review. Judgment affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Alexander v. Pennsylvania Co.
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • December 8, 1891
    ...the facts, and state them separately from its conclusions of law. Senff v. Pyle, 46 Ohio St. 102, 24 N.E. 595; Young v. Pennsylvania Co., 46 Ohio St. 558, 24 N.E. 595. Neither does it give as the ground of the reversal any one the errors assigned in that court. What it really does disclose ......
  • Charles v. Fawley
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • November 1, 1904
    ... ... the following authorities: ...          Railway ... Co. v. Thurstin, 44 Ohio St. 525; Young, Treas. v ... Pennsylvania Co., 46 Ohio St. 558; Senff v. Pyle, 46 Ohio St ... 102; Landon v. Reid, 10 Ohio 202; Dial v. Holter, 6 Ohio St ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT