
    (81 South. 139)
    ELLIOTT v. DAVIS.
    (6 Div. 467.)
    (Court of Appeals of Alabama.
    Jan. 21, 1919.)
    1. Appeal and Error <&wkey;502(7) — Motion eor New Triai>-Reservation oe Exceptions— Record.
    On appeal from judgment denying a motion for new trial, where it does not appear from the record that an exception was reserved to the ruling of the court on the motion for new. trial, judgment must be affirmed.
    2. Appeal and Error <&wkey;502(7), 528(1) — Motion eor New Trial — Bill oe Exceptions.
    • On appeal from judgment denying motion for new trial, a record of the exception reserved to the ruling of the court on the motion for new trial, together with the evidence and the ruling of the court on such motion, should be incorporated in the bill of exceptions.
    
      Appeal from Circuit Court, Tuscaloosa County; Henry B. Foster, Judge.
    Action between J. J. Elliott and O. M. Davis. From a judgment denying motion for new trial, the former appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Howard L. Smith and Allen & Fisk, of Birmingham, for appellant.
    Brown & Ward, of Tuscaloosa, for appellee.
   SAMFORD, J.

It is not necessary to a decision of this case to pass upon the numerous . Questions argued in brief. It does not appear from the record in this case that an exception was reserved to the ruling of the trial court on the motion for a new trial, which has been held to be necessary, and which, together with the evidence and the ruling of the trial court on the motion, should be incorporated in the bill of exceptions. Britton v. State, 15 Ala. App. 584, 74 South. 721; Empire Clothing Co. v. Roberts, Johnson Rand Shoe Co., ante, p. 86, 75 South. 635; King v. State, ante, p. 103, 75 South. 692; Ross v. State, ante, p. 393, 78 South. 309; Powell v. Folmar, 201 Ala. 271, 78 South. 47. For the above reason, the judgment must be affirmed.

Affirmed.  