bill of exception การใช้

• Prior to his appeal, Malony had filed a bill of exceptions in the trial court.
• The record of appeal was prepared as either bill of exceptions for writ of error from an action at law or a transcript for an appeal from a suit in equity.
• To that finding and judgment the defendant excepted ( but without preserving, by bill of exceptions, the evidence upon which the court acted ), and brought this writ of error.
• It does not aver a conspiracy or even an intention to raise their wages; and it appears by the bill of exceptions, that the case was not put upon the footing of a conspiracy to raise their wages.
• As the defendant made the objection to the admissibility of the deposition, and it was excluded, it was incumbent on him to make it appear, by the bill of exceptions, what the ground of objection was, and that it was a valid ground.
• Following Scopes's conviction, the ACLU grew frustrated over Neal's handling of the case, especially after he missed the deadline to file a bill of exceptions to the Tennessee Supreme Court, which essentially meant they couldn't base their appeal on the state's handling of the case.
• The Court of Appeals held that the case was reviewed by writ of error and since the bill of exceptions showed no special findings of fact but only a general finding in a case at law tried without a jury, it lacked power to rule as to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the finding so sustained the verdict.
• The prosecution countered with arguments that the evidence convicting Frank was substantial and that listing Judge Roan's doubts in the defense's bill of exceptions was not the proper vehicle for " carry [ ing ] the views of the judge . " On February 17, 1914, in a 142-page decision, the court denied Frank a new trial by a 4 2 vote.
• Examples include " Fleury v . Jackson and Tompkins ", 1 Arizona 361 ( 1887 ) which denied an appeal because the request was submitted after the allotted time for such action had expired and French's affirmation of the lower court's ruling in " Territory v . Selden ", 1 Arizona 381 ( 1879 ) because the appeal did not include a bill of exceptions.
• At such a trial all points of law were argued fully by counsel and settled on the spot by decisions as  final and conclusive as those of the highest appellate court on a bill of exceptions .  Such an accommodation was rooted in the consideration that the defendant and the public had a unique interest in securing, in the first instance, a verdict based on correct and authoritative rulings and, therefore, in avoiding repeated trials.
• As the direction of a verdict for the defendant appears to have been rested on the instruction that there was not sufficient evidence, to be submitted to the jury, of a new promise to take the case out of the statute of limitations, and as, if the jury had found that there was such new promise, there was evidence on both sides for the consideration of the jury on the other issues, under proper instructions, and the bills of exceptions do not purport to set out all the evidence on such other issues, a new trial must be had.
• In the absence of any apparent informality, if the objection made by the defendant to the admission of the deposition was made on the ground of an informality, that ground, to avail him here, should appear in the bill of exceptions, with a sufficient statement to enable this Court to see that the ground was a valid one, and the informality on which the deposition was ruled out should, to avail him, be stated in the bill of exceptions, with sufficient other matter to enable this Court to say that the identical informality on which the ruling of the court proceeded existed, and was good ground for the ruling.
• In the absence of any apparent informality, if the objection made by the defendant to the admission of the deposition was made on the ground of an informality, that ground, to avail him here, should appear in the bill of exceptions, with a sufficient statement to enable this Court to see that the ground was a valid one, and the informality on which the deposition was ruled out should, to avail him, be stated in the bill of exceptions, with sufficient other matter to enable this Court to say that the identical informality on which the ruling of the court proceeded existed, and was good ground for the ruling.
• He " admit [ ted ] . . . that the contracting parties had the power afterwards to settle its position " but argued that " they never saw proper to do [ so ] . " Catron argued that " [ t ] he land in controversy was granted before this line was run " and thus that the treaty of Holston " will manifestly tend to disturb titles made in reference to another line . " Catron concurred only because " the bill of exceptions sets forth not a single fact; and the correctness of the instructions of the Court below cannot therefore be tested by the evidence given on the trial; whether they are right or wrong, it is impossible for me to say "; thus, he defaulted to a " presumption that the instructions were proper ."