Darling v. Gill

Ohio Supreme Court

Darling v. Gill

1 Wright 73, 1 Ohio Ch. 73

DecidedAugust 15, 1832

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Wright 73 (Darling v. Gill) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Darling v. Gill, 1 Wright 73, 1 Ohio Ch. 73 (Ohio 1832).

Pincite

Opinion

BY THE COURT.

The bill of exceptions, which is the foundation of the error complained, of in this case, is signed and sealed by the president judge and one associate judge only, which is less than a quorum of the court. It is true there is another signature ; but it purports to be by the president judge, as attorney in fact for one of the associate judges. The signing a bill of exceptions is so far a judicial act, that it cannot be performed by attorney. A judge must act in his own proper person ; he cannot act by deputy or attorney. We can take no judicial notice of this bill of exceptions.

The writ of error is dismissed.

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

BY THE COURT.

The bill of exceptions, which is the foundation of the error complained, of in this case, is signed and sealed by the president judge and one associate judge only, which is less than a quorum of the court. It is true there is another signature ; but it purports to be by the president judge, as attorney in fact for one of the associate judges. The signing a bill of exceptions is so far a judicial act, that it cannot be performed by attorney. A judge must act in his own proper person ; he cannot act by deputy or attorney. We can take no judicial notice of this bill of exceptions.

The writ of error is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Wright 73, 1 Ohio Ch. 73, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darling-v-gill-ohio-1832.