| Show r AN OPINION ON APPeALS One Handed Banded Down by Supreme Court Practise and Procedure JUSTICE BARTCH DISSENTS III In Cia ClIS of iii A Iii iii ID H 1 P 1 V VAn II An Ami opinion on points as asto asto asto to the practise and III In the time matter of als to th the supreme court has hag been handed down by that court In tim tho case capo of ot tho the Smith Table company appellant vs VI I 1 W V Madsen which suits WILli by the court su ses v cral weeks u ago n The previous opinion In the emote eano thu 1 not mint fully consIder time of which were wised raIsed hence honce another In III which those thoo matters are arc fully discussed has been handed down dowil downIn In tills this ca case caso o tho thi a motion in III n tho the supreme con court it to lo strike strikeout out the tho a assignments s of error set act out nut luthy by hy appellant on the ground that they were not filed tiled or sorted served at nt tho the proper ilIum or place ilace nail anil that lila t no of error were sero over ever filed tiled In the court helen below nor were score they presented to court or nettled In lit the bill of exceptions lions It that the assign were store first made and filed 1111 1 III in tho supreme court CHIEF JUSTICE DISSENTS The majority opinion of tho the court ourt by Justices McCarty McCurty and holds that tho lao motion to strike strikeout out should bo bet Jellel On the thu th other brunch Chief in his min minority opinion holds that the motion should have been granted In Iii the majority opinion It Is III held that I the tho ho old out statute requiring the tho petition In error to be attached to the tho antI lIel In the supreme court Wilt WIH vi pealed re III in 1003 1 03 and since then there theN been Jeen no controlling that matter Rules 0 Ii anti ami 10 of the supreme court require the tha appellant to t set not et forth III n his abstract and auth the thc particular errors error upon which he relies for or n a 10 to Ursal By lly this It In is held la Is meant the tOte theof of or error mill amid hence the theof of ot error were svere properly filch lii III n this tilts cave cuse rime rile opInion further that thit the tho court has hall whatever to tu F with the thu assignments of oC error nor imor lire are ir the time Assignments to 10 ho bl Presented J JIn In he the bill hili of oC exceptions for tor or tho the con COli consideration of tho the trial court or for forU forIt forit It U to II review or correct army 1111 error as assigned signet signed The Tho opinion further states that thaI since the repeal of time tha governing that matter It Ittin hams lIall tin been time the to consider the tilt assIgnments If it made In either court The rite majority opinion therefore hol holds loUI that the tho Ih motion to strike out Is U pr denied WHAT SAYS BAYS Chief dissents from tho the ruling of lila Ills associates miamI anil says Under our statute anti and practise such nuch sPecifications of ot errors mutt lie ho 11 filed led In Inthe Inthe Inthe the court below and n nd proper service mudo upon Ullon the adverse party and where na as here sed relate lo to the of the tho evidence to tip Justify thin tha ruling or thing complained of if the tho must mu t bo ho In u II hill hili hi I I of ot o f exceptions rim Fit support of hIli IiI contention Chief quotes tho the following from n a former ormer opinion rendered by the supreme court HOme pome years ago ngo Tho lite provision In section 3 86 11 It S B Shut that hut such Ruch draft of ut time tho bill of ot excel exception ion tion must contain nil Ill tho the exceptions token upon which the party relies relic ox ex eludes dUlles Implication all nil objections arid adil exceptions taken during the time course courtis of ot tho the trial upon which tho tIme party up all tines IncH not rely for n a reversal and this Is lit In perfect I rf ct harmony with the time provision lons In the tue suction section which provides that the time objection mullet In h stated with so BO much of the lime evidence or other matter as R Is necessary sary to explain It nil maul which lIkewIse e excludes all evidence ln l other mat matter ter not nol to explain tho time ob oil objection jert Ion hel therefore these theBe provisions of thu tIm statute are construed their plain meaning Is 18 that Hint the hill bill of exceptions when settled shall ani nil mall thiu th objections anti exceptions upon which the appellant relIes relics hut but no oth othera erR era with only such Bud evidence or other matter us Is necessary to 10 much uch exception The Thetis thu art also In lit entire accord with time tho th further provision In iii section which makes It tho duty of ot the In Iii settling the tim bill Jill to In strike out of mf It U nil redundant unit and useless matter so flO that the tho may be he pr cd ed an briefly ns as possible Of In 11 conclusion ho he contends that th the unction motion to strike tho the iii of error from Crom the Illes hould have 1110 been en grunted |
