
    Jacob Esty et al. v. James C. Grant.
    Bill of exceptions—its requisites. Where the error assigned is, that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence, but the bill of exceptions in the case does not purport to embody all the evidence, this court will not regard such assignment of error as properly before it.
    Appeal from the Superior Court of Chicago; the. Hon. Joseph E. Gary, Judge, presiding.
    This was an action of assumpsit, brought by James C. Grant, against Jacob Esty, S. M. Waite, Joel Bullard and Beilly Burdett, upon the common counts, for labor and services of the plaintiff by him done and performed, and for materials by him furnished for the defendants, at their request. The defendants appeared by attorney, and by agreement a jury was waived and a trial had before the court, which resulted in a judgment in favor of the plaintiff. To reverse this judgment the defendants appeal.
    Messrs. Bennett & Sherburne, for the appellants.
    Messrs. Barker & Tuley and Mr. William Hopkins, for the appellee.
   Mr. Chief Justice Lawrence

delivered the opinion of the Court:

In this case we are asked to reverse the judgment merely on the ground that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence. But the bill of exceptions does not purport to state all the evidence, and, in conformity with the oft repeated decisions of this court, we must affirm the judgment.

Judgment affirmed.  