Kouts v. Superior Court

HOUSER, J.

Following a ruling made by the trial court on each of three motions which were presented to said court, each at a time different from that of either of the others, the petitioner herein, who was the “aggrieved” party in the trial court, presented to said court for its settlement thereof her proposed' bill of exceptions.

For the purpose of considering the point here at issue, it is unnecessary to set forth more than an excerpt or example of the contents of the proposed bill of exceptions. After the title of the court and cause, the following appeared :

“Be it remembered that on February 10, 1933, the following motion came on to be heard in Department 43 of this court, . . . (here print notice of motion for February 7, 1933, and affidavits of William F. McLaughlin and Thomas B. Kouts and supplementary affidavit of William F. McLaughlin dated Feb. 4, 1933).

"That defendant appeared by his counsel George I. Devor and plaintiff appeared in person and by her counsel W. C. Dalzell. That thereupon the following proceedings took place: (Setting forth what appears to be a transcript of what was said by the court and respective counsel at that time.)

“Thereupon the following minute order was made: (here print the minute order of February 10,

1933);

and was entered at the margin of the entry of the original interlocutory decree on the 20th day of February, 1933, as follows: (here print the marginal stamped entry.)

“Thereafter on February 17, 1933, counsel for the defendant presented to the court for signature and in the absence of plaintiff and her counsel and the court signed the following order: (here print the order of February 17,

1933);

which was entered on February 24th, 1933, in Book 842, page 242, of judgments. ”

[701]

The course pursued as to the other rulings of which complaint was made are practically indentical in form with that hereinbefore outlined as to the first of such rulings. Then followed the several “specifications of error”, together with a form of order of settlement of the proposed bill of exceptions.