
    Cornell vs. Davis.
    On an appeal from a final judgment, the ruling of the court below on intermediate motions cannot be reviewed, unless the motion papers are made a part of the record by a bill of exceptions.
    APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County.
    Action to foreclose a mortgage, the complaint containing all the allegations usual in such a case. The defendant demurred, assigning all the causes allowed by law, and the plaintiff obtained judgment on account of the frivolousness thereof, and the defendant appealed. It appears from the paper book used on the argument, that a motion bad been made by the .defendant to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff’s attorney did not serve a copy of the complaint on the defendant, according to a demand therefor, the action having been commenced by the service of a summons only, and that such motion was over-ruled; but the record returned on the appeal, did not contain any bill of exceptions.
    
      M. Steever, for appellant.
    
      D. G. Hooker, for respondent.
   By the Court,

Paine, J.

This is an appeal from a foreclosure judgment. The record shows a demurrer to the complaint, assigning all the reasons which the statute allows. It was clearly frivolous, and was so adjudged by the court below.

The question which the appellant’s counsel intended to present here, is not presented for want of a bill of exceptions.

He moved the court below to dismiss the complaint, because no copy of it bad been served after a demand, which facts were shown by an affidavit. But this being an appeal from the judgment, and there being no bill of exceptions the affidavit and motion papers are no part of the record, and we cannot loot into them.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs.  