Snodgrass v. Copenhaver

12 S.E. 695, 34 W. Va. 171, 1890 W. Va. LEXIS 65
West Virginia Supreme Court·Decided November 25, 1890·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Holt, Judge:

This was an action of ejectment tried in the Circuit Court of "Wetzel county with verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. During the progress of the trial various exceptions were taken to rulings of the court and noted on the record; and a motion was made by defendants Copen-haver and Barkus to the court below to set aside the verdict of the jury and grant them anew trial which motion the court overruled. The record does uot show that any objection was made or exception taken to such rulings therefore this Court can not look into the assignment of errors contained in the bill of exceptions. State v. Hollins, 31 W. Va. 363 (6 S. E. Rep 923); Brown v. Brown, 29 W. Va. 777 (2 S. E. Rep. 808); Congrove v. Burdett, 28 W. Va. 220; Danks v. Rodeheaver, 26 W. Va. 274; State v. Thompson, Id. 149; State v. Phares, 24 W. Va. 657; Riddle v. Core, 21 W. Va. 530; Shrewsbury v. Miller, 10 W. Va. 115. The judgment of the Circuit Court is therefore affirmed.

AeRIRMED.

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

Snodgrass v. Copenhaver, 12 S.E. 695, 34 W. Va. 171, 1890 W. Va. LEXIS 65 (W. Va. 1890).

12 S.E. 695 (Snodgrass v. Copenhaver) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wescott v. Des Moines City Railway Co.
187 Iowa 1373 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1919)
Stoneman v. Commonwealth
25 Va. 887 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1874)