Opinion · Ohio Supreme Court
McDougal v. Fleming
McDougal v. Fleming, 4 Ohio 354 (Ohio 1829)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Ohio Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- Ohio
- Date
- 1829-12-15
- Topic
- general
*By the Court : The party excepting must distinctly point out wherein he may have been prejudiced by the decision excepted to. King v. Kenny, 4 Ohio, 81, 82. In the present case, the whole evidence is not disclosed, nor any precise question raised, by the bill of exceptions. The issue, in an action of assumpsit, is so broad that we can suppose many situations, in which the record would be proper testimony.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed McDougal v. Fleming. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 1 opinion
The party excepting must distinctly point out wherein he may have been prejudiced by the decision excepted to. King v. Kenny, 4 Ohio, 81, 82. In the present case, the whole evidence is not disclosed, nor any precise question raised, by the bill of exceptions. The issue, in an action of assumpsit, is so broad that we can suppose many situations, in which the record would be proper testimony. Inasmuch, then, as the record does not show that the court below erred, we affirm the judgment.
Judgment affirmed.