Boardman v. Toffey, 117 U.S. 271 (1886)

U.S. Supreme Court

Boardman v. Toffey, 117 U.S. 271 (1886)

Boardman v. Toffey

Argued March 11, 1886

Decided March 15, 1886

117 U.S. 271

Syllabus

If the trial below is by the court without a jury, and the findings of facts are general, only such rulings of the court in the progress of the trial can be reviewed as are presented by a bill of exceptions.

The case is stated in the opinion of the Court.

Page 117 U. S. 272

U.S. Supreme Court

Boardman v. Toffey, 117 U.S. 271 (1886)

Boardman v. Toffey

Argued March 11, 1886

Decided March 15, 1886

117 U.S. 271

ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Syllabus

If the trial below is by the court without a jury, and the findings of facts are general, only such rulings of the court in the progress of the trial can be reviewed as are presented by a bill of exceptions.

The case is stated in the opinion of the Court.

Page 117 U. S. 272

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

This judgment is affirmed. The trial was by the court without a jury, and there is no special finding of facts. The only questions presented by the bill of exceptions which we can consider are those which relate to the refusal of the court to allow certain interrogatories to be put to witnesses on the stand, and in these we find no error. The general finding prevents all inquiry by us into the special facts and conclusions of law on which that finding rests. Norris v. Jackson, 9 Wall. 125; Cooper v. Omohundro, 19 Wall. 69; Martinton v. Fairbanks, 112 U. S. 673.

Affirmed.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.

Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.