Ott v. Braun

48 Colo. 417
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado
DecidedApril 15, 1910
DocketNo. 6367
StatusPublished

This text of 48 Colo. 417 (Ott v. Braun) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ott v. Braun, 48 Colo. 417 (Colo. 1910).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Gabbert

delivered the opinion of the court:

By this proceeding plaintiff in error seeks to have reviewed a judgment of the district court dis[418]*418missing an appeal which she had taken from the county court. No exception was taken to this judgment.

Generally speaking, judgments and orders are not reviewable in this court unless exceptions thereto were duly taken and preserved.—Smith v. Mock, 33 Colo. 154; Marean v. Stanley, 21 Colo. 43; Hinsdale El. Co. v. Ogle, 45 Colo. 454.

The case at bar falls within this rule.—In re Estate of Smiley, 4 Col. App. 582.

The abstract of record recites that an exception was taken to the judgment dismissing the appeal. This statement immediately follows the record entry by the clerk of the judgment of which the plaintiff in error’ complains. We do not believe the transcript justifies the statement that such an exception was taken; but, waiving this, there is no bill of exceptions. The transcript only purports, as certified by the clerk of the district court, to be a true, complete and perfect transcript of certain pleadings, motions, etc., and orders directed by the court below. It is the established practice in this jurisdiction, that exceptions must be preserved and authenticated by bill of exceptions allowed, signed and sealed by .the judge. A journal entry by the clerk will not suffice.—Patrick v. Weston, 21 Colo. 73; Rutter v. Shumway, 16 Colo. 95; Burnall v. Wachtel, 4 Col. App. 556; Kirkwood v. School District, 45 Colo. 368.

In as much as' there is no question presented by the record which we can consider or determine, the writ of error must be dismissed, and it is so ordered.

Dismissed.

Chief Justice Steele and Mr. Justice Hill concur.

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

Related

Rutter v. Shumway
16 Colo. 95 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1891)
Marean v. Stanley
21 Colo. 43 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1895)
Patrick v. Weston
21 Colo. 73 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1895)
Smith v. Mock
33 Colo. 154 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1905)
Kirkwood v. School District No. 7
45 Colo. 368 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1909)
Hinsdale Electric Co. v. Ogle
45 Colo. 454 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1909)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
48 Colo. 417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ott-v-braun-colo-1910.