1. The defendant in error raises the question that the bill of exceptions should be dismissed for lack of proper service. However, the record reveals that counsel for the defendant in error signed the following acknowledgment within 10 days after the bill of exceptions was certified and filed: “Due and legal service is hereby acknowledged on the within and foregoing bill of exceptions, copy and all other and further service is hereby waived.” This acknowledgment of service is sufficient to give jurisdiction to this court.
Stewart Oil Co. v. Schell,
2. The general grounds of the motion for a new trial are neither argued nor insisted upon and shall be treated as abandoned.
3. Special grounds 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the amended motion for a new trial are incomplete or without merit for one or more of
*513
the following rules of law. “An assignment of error on admission of evidence over objection is insufficient where it does not appear that the ground of objection was stated to the judge at the time the evidence was offered.”
Luke v. State,
A ground of a motion for a new trial complaining of a portion of the trial court’s charge as misleading must not only show wherein it was misleading
(Riddle v. Sheppard,
The plaintiff in error contends that the trial court should have given further explanatory and definitive instructions in connection with a portion of the charge given to the jury which were applicable and pertinent to the facts of the case. There was no timely request for the trial court to further charge the jury. The ground is without merit.
Rhodes v. State,
4. Special ground 6 of the amended motion for a new trial complains of the failure of the trial court to give in charge a written request pertaining to principles concerning conditions precedent in relation to contracts, citing
Daniel v. Dalton News Co.,
Judgment affirmed.
