
    Succession of Orrach v. Succession of Polanco.
    Appeal from the District Court of Humaeao.
    Motion for the approval of a statement of facts by this Supreme Court.
    No. 479.
    Decided June 7, 1911.
    Appeal — Statement or Case — Estimate or Trial Court. — When the transcript of the reeord, filed for the purpose of an appeal, lacks a statement of the facts, the Supreme Court will not disturb the estimate of the evidence made by the trial court.
    Id. — Opinion or Trial Court. — The omission of a statement of faets cannot be supplied by the faets set forth in the opinion of the trial court, inasmuch as it does not appear that such facts are all those which were brought out at the trial, or that they were accepted by both parties in due time with the approval of the court and in due legal form.
    Id. — Approval of Statement of Pacts bv Supreme Court. — The Supreme Court cannot approve a statement of facts filed by appellant, when the transcript of the record, filed for the purpose of the appeal, does not include a statement of facts approved by the court below with the intervention of the parties.
    The facts are stated in the decision.
    
      Mr. José de Gusmcm Benitez for petitioners.
    
      Mr. Antonio Sarmiento for the adverse party.
   Whereas in the record submitted for the decision of the appeal no statement of facts was included, as stated by this Supreme Court in the opinion which served as a basis for the judgment rendered on November 11 of the year last past, wherefore we cannot disturb the estimate of the same made by the trial court, as established in numerous decisions of this tribunal;

Whereas the omission of the statement of facts cannot be remedied or supplied by the facts which the court below deemed proper to state in the opinion upon which it based its judgment of July 29, 1909, inasmuch as it does not appear that said facts were all that were brought forth at the trial, nor that they were accepted in due time by both parties, with the corresponding judicial approval and in accordance with due legal procedure ;

Whereas there is no means wherebj7' this court can accept and sign the statement of facts submitted by counsel for the appellants for the purposes of the appeal taken to the Supreme Court of the United States, to which approval counsel for the adverse party objects inasmuch as the grounds for approving and signing said statement of facts are lacking, and there is also lacking the statement of facts approved by the trial court with the intervention of the parties;

Held: That the statement of facts submitted by the party appellant can neither be approved nor signed.

Motion overruled.

Cliief Justice Hernández and Justices MacLekry, "Wolf, del Toro, and Aldrey concurred.  