Crews v. Baird
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Nez Perces County. The following are the errors assigned by defendant in his statement on motion for new trial, and are used as the specification of error on this appeal: 1. The verdict is not sustained by the evidence, in that plaintiff admitted notice of the vendor’s indebtedness and knowledge of Frank Brothers’ judgment ■ against him before the purchase of the property, and made no inquiry 'as to the effect of his (plaintiff’s) -purchase upon…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Nez Perces County. The following are the errors assigned by defendant in his statement on motion for new trial, and are used as the specification of error on this appeal: 1. The verdict is not sustained by the evidence, in that plaintiff admitted notice of the vendor’s indebtedness and knowledge of Frank Brothers’ judgment ■ against him before the purchase of the property, and made no inquiry 'as to the effect of his (plaintiff’s) -purchase upon Stroup’s creditors; 2. The verdict is contrary to the evidence, ir. that the hasty sale of all the vendor’s property,…
1Per curiam
In this ease the appellant contends that the verdict of the jury is against the evidence, and we are asked to examine this question. That which purports to be a statement of the evidence and exceptions thereto was not settled and signed by the district judge. That the settling and signing of the statement is mandatory, and its omission fatal, is a proposition that cannot be disputed. Without this authentication the statement cannot be treated as part of the judgment-roll, nor be considered in this court. The only question properly presented for our consideration is whether the complaint is…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State v. WhiteIdaho Supreme Court · 1900
- Common School District No. 27 v. Twin Falls National BankIdaho Supreme Court · 1931