Crews v. Baird

Feb 21, 1885
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Broderick
Per CURIAM.

In this ease the appellant contends that the verdict of the jury is against ‍‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‍the evidence, and we are asked to examine this question. That which purports to be a statement of the evidence and exceptions thereto was not settled and signed ‍‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‍by the district judge. That the settling and signing of the statement is mandatory, and its omission fatal, is a proposition that cannot be disputed. Without this authentication the ‍‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‍statement cannot be treated as part of the judgment-roll, nor be considered in this court. The only question properly presented for our consideration is whether the complaint is sufficient ‍‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‍to support the judgment. We think it is. The complaint alleges the wrongful taking of the property in question, the detention, the demand, and damages for wrongfully withholding ‍‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‍the same. We think this sufficient.

Judgment affirmed.

Morgan, C. J., and Broderick and Buck, JJ., concurring.