Snodgrass v. Copenhaver
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
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.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.