Opinion

Brown v. Cumberland Telegraph & Telephone Co.

  • 221 F. 261
  • 137 C.C.A. 206
  • 1915 U.S. App. LEXIS 1330
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Filed
Mar 22, 1915
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 16.9%

The opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a suit to recover damages growing out of a fire. On the trial, after hearing the evidence, the court directed a verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff sued out this writ of error, assigning as error the direction of the verdict for the defendant.

The bill of exceptions taken in the case, without reciting the evidence, purports “to attach and make a part of the record all testimony, documents, evidence, etc., of all kinds.” In the transcript we find, under the head of “Testimony Taken in the Case,” what seems to be the examination of ten or more witnesses; but it is not identified in any manner by either stenographer, clerk, or judge. This renders the hill worthless and ineffective (see Weaver v. Schumpert, 168 Fed. 43 , 93 C. C. A. 465 ); but, as the plaintiff in error makes no point upon the same, we have read and considered the transcribed evidence as though the bill of exceptions was sufficient.

*262 •From a careful consideration of the whole, we are forced to the conclusion that there is not sufficient evidence in the case which would have warranted the jury in finding a verdict for the plaintiff, and that therefore the instruction to find a verdict for the defendant was correct.

Judgment affirmed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.