MISSOURI PAC. RY. CO. v. CHICAGO & A. R. CO.

132 U.S. 191 (10 S.Ct. 65, 33 L.Ed. 309)

MISSOURI PAC. RY. CO. v. CHICAGO & A. R. CO.

Decided: November 25, 1889

John F. Dillon, for plaintiff in error.

Alex. Martin, for defendant in error.

GRAY, J.

In this action, tried by the circuit court without a jury, there is no case stated by the parties, or finding of facts by the court. The bill of exceptions, after setting forth all the evidence introduced at the trial, states that 'there were no declarations of law asked for or given by the court;' and the single exception taken is to the overruling of a motion for a new trial, which is a matter of discretion, and not a subject of exception, according to the practice of the courts of the United States. In regard to motions for a new trial and bills of exceptions, those courts are independent of any statute or practice prevailing in the courts of the state in which the trial is had. Railroad Co. v. Horst, 93 U. S. 291; Newcomb v. Wood, 97 U. S. 581; In re Iron Co., 128 U. S. 544, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 150.

Judgment affirmed.

CC∅ | Transformed by Public.Resource.Org