Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

ROBINSON, APPELLANT v. CITY OF SOUTH EUCLID ET AL., APPELLEES.

Supreme Court — Affirmance — No bill of exceptions — Appeal to Court of Appeals on questions of law and fact — Cause heard on pleadings, evidence and stipulation of facts.

BY THE COURT.

Counsel for appellant contend that, under Section 11571, General Code, a bill of exceptions is not necessary in a case in which the entry of judgment shows that the case was tried on an agreed statement of facts which was filed with the papers in the case.

The journal entry of the Court of Appeals in the instant case recites that the cause was "heard on the pleadings, evidence and stipulation of fact." (Emphasis supplied.) Section 11571, General Code, does not apply to a case which was heard on the evidence and an agreed statement or stipulation of facts.

There being no bill of exceptions in the instant case, the record is insufficient for review and the judgment of the Court of Appeals is therefore affirmed. Townsend v. Harrison, 58 Ohio St. 398, 50 N.E. 985; Tenesy v. City of Cleveland, 133 Ohio St. 251, 13 N.E.2d 122.

Judgment affirmed.

WEYGANDT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, BELL, WILLIAMS, TURNER, MATTHIAS and HART, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

ROBINSON v. SOUTH EUCLID
(May 29, 1946)