McClarty v. Penn Mutual Life Insurance
This text of 63 S.E. 224 (McClarty v. Penn Mutual Life Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. When no motion for a new trial „is made, the evidence should be embodied in the bill of exceptions, or attached as an exhibit thereto, and properly identified, or contained in a brief approved by the trial judge and made part of the record. In a suit' on an insurance policy, where the case is tried on an agreed statement of facts, and a judgment in favor of the defendant is rendered by the court, and the exception is to this judgment, the embodiment in the record of what purports to be a copy of the agreement .signed by counsel is not sufficient, Mann v. Archer, 69 Ga. 767.
2. Without a consideration of the agreed statement of facts upon which the case was tried, this court is unable to review the correctness of [725]*725the final judgment on the merits; and as there is no. other assignment of error in the bill, of exceptions, an affirmance must necessarily result.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
63 S.E. 224, 131 Ga. 724, 1908 Ga. LEXIS 192, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcclarty-v-penn-mutual-life-insurance-ga-1908.