156 N.E. 520 | Ind. Ct. App. | 1927
Appellants have attempted to present two questions: (1) Error in overruling their motion in arrest of judgment; and (2) in overruling their motion for a new trial. Inasmuch as all 1. the reasons assigned in support of the motion in arrest of judgment all relate to the sufficiency of the facts alleged to state a cause of action, the court did not err in overruling such motion. All objections to the complaint for the reasons stated were waived by a failure to demur thereto. Malone,Trustee, v. Kitchen (1922),
All questions attempted to be presented by the second assignment of error require a consideration of the evidence, which is not in the record. The motion for a new trial 2, 3. was overruled May 8, 1926, but no time was given within which to file a bill of exceptions. On May 15, 1926, after the overruling of the motion in arrest, time was given beyond the term within which to file a bill of exceptions. The bill was not filed within the term, and for that reason the evidence is not in the record. See Tozer, Admr., v. Hobbs'Estate (1923),
Judgment affirmed.
