MISS. PAC. R'Y v. Ch. and Alt. R'd.
This text of 132 U.S. 191 (MISS. PAC. R'Y v. Ch. and Alt. R'd.) 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.
Opinion
MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY
v.
CHICAGO AND ALTON RAILROAD COMPANY.
Supreme Court of United States.
Mr. John F. Dillon for plaintiff in error.
Mr. Alexander Martin and Mr. Robert H. Kern for defendant in error.
MR. JUSTICE GRAY delivered the opinion of the court.
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 *192 trial is had. Indianapolis Railroad v. Horst, 93 U.S. 291; Newcomb v. Wood, 97 U.S. 581; Chateaugay Iron Co., Petitioner, 128 U.S. 544.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
132 U.S. 191, 10 S. Ct. 65, 33 L. Ed. 309, 1889 U.S. LEXIS 1860, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miss-pac-ry-v-ch-and-alt-rd-scotus-1889.