
    David Irwin v. Michael Schlief.
    
      Abandonment of exceptions — Review of cases tried, without a jury — Affirm> anee of judgment.
    
    Exceptions not referred to in the arguments of counsel are presumed to have been abandoned.
    Where no written finding of facts is ashed fo? or made, the Supreme-Court cannot review the facts or evidence -in a suit at law tried without a jury.
    Judgment is affirmed where no question is presented which the court can consider.
    Error to Kent.
    Submitted April 7.
    Decided April 25.
    Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error.
    Affirmed.
    
      Maynard c& Wanty for appellant.
    
      Dennis L. Rogers for appellee.
   Marston, J.

This case was tried by the court without a jury. A bill of exceptions was settled, but no written finding of facts was asked for or made. Exceptions were taken to rulings made upon the admissibility of certain testimony, but no reference whatever is made thereto in the brief of counsel. We must assume therefore that they have been abandoned. The argument submitted is upon the merits, based upon facts appearing in the bill of exceptions. It is almost needless to say that this court cannot review the facts or evidence in the case. As no question has therefore been presented to this Court which we can consider, the judgment must be affirmed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.  