Opinion
No. 84-771.
Filed April 4, 1986.
1. Records: Appeal and Error. The responsibility for filing a bill of exceptions in the supreme Court rests upon the appellant. 2. Records: Evidence: Appeal and Error. When, on appeal, this court is asked to review errors which require a consideration of the evidence, we cannot give them consideration in the absence of a bill of exceptions.
Appeal from the District Court for Scotts Bluff County: ALFRED J. KORTUM, Judge. Affirmed.
Harry R. Meister of Brenner Meister Law Office, for appellant.
John W. Ballew, Jr., of Raymond, Olsen, Ediger Ballew, P.C., for appellee Taylor.
KRIVOSHA, C.J., HASTINGS, CAPORALE, and GRANT, JJ., and BUCKLEY, D.J.
Defendant Kirk A. Wallesen has appealed a jury verdict of $9,000 in favor of the plaintiff, which was returned following the court's instruction in favor of the plaintiff on the issue of liability.
Eight separate errors are detailed in defendant's brief. However, the resolution of each necessitates a bill of exceptions. None has been filed with this court. The responsibility for filing such bill of exceptions in the Supreme Court rests upon the appellant. Neb. Ct. R. 5C(5) (rev. 1983).
When, on appeal, this court is asked to review errors which require a consideration of the evidence, we cannot give them consideration in the absence of a bill of exceptions. Lanc v. Douglas County Welfare Administration, 189 Neb. 651, 204 N.W.2d 387 (1973). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.