Betts v. Mugridge

Supreme Court

Betts v. Mugridge

154 U.S. 644, 14 S. Ct. 1188, 1879 U.S. LEXIS 1378

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJanuary 13, 1879

DocketNo. 870

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 154 U.S. 644 (Betts v. Mugridge) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Betts v. Mugridge, 154 U.S. 644, 14 S. Ct. 1188, 1879 U.S. LEXIS 1378 (1879).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Waite

delivered the opinion of the court.

This cause was tried by the court below without the intervention of a jury. The facts were not agreed upon and there is no special finding. No exceptions were taken to the rulings of the court in the progress of the trial, but all the evidence has been embodied in a bill of exceptions, and the only error assigned is that the general finding of the court was in favor of the defendant below when it should have been for the plaintiff. We have often decided that a bill of exceptions cannot be used to bring up the whole testimony for review when the case has been tried by the court, any more than when there has been a trial by jury. Norris v. Jackson, 9 Wall. 125, 128; Insurance Co. v. Sea, 21 Wall. 158.

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Chief Justice Waite

delivered the opinion of the court.

This cause was tried by the court below without the intervention of a jury. The facts were not agreed upon and there is no special finding. No exceptions were taken to the rulings of the court in the progress of the trial, but all the evidence has been embodied in a bill of exceptions, and the only error assigned is that the general finding of the court was in favor of the defendant below when it should have been for the plaintiff. We have often decided that a bill of exceptions cannot be used to bring up the whole testimony for review when the case has been tried by the court, any more than when there has been a trial by jury. Norris v. Jackson, 9 Wall. 125, 128; Insurance Co. v. Sea, 21 Wall. 158.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

154 U.S. 644, 14 S. Ct. 1188, 1879 U.S. LEXIS 1378, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/betts-v-mugridge-scotus-1879.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack