
    Sophia Lowe, appellee, v. John Riley et al., appellants, Impleaded with George A. Hoagland et al., appellees.
    Filed September 19, 1894.
    No. 5401.
    1. Bill of Exceptions: Review. A bill of exceptions must contain all the evidence upon which questions of fact are to be determined, a reference in such bill to evidence to be found by referenee lo another bill filed in an independent ease not being sufficient.
    2. Appeal from Order Appointing Receiver:1 Review: Bill of Exceptions. Where there is not such a bill of exceptions as will permit of a consideration of the facts upon the evidence, and where the averments of the petition for a receiver were in no way denied except by affidavits used as evidence, the rights of the parties must be determined solely upon the allegations of the petition accepted as true.
    Appeal from the district court of Douglas county. Heard below before Doane, J.
    
      A. G. Read, for appellants.
    
      Chas. JE. Clapp, Clinton N. Powell, James B. Meihle, Gregory, Day & Day, Cornish & Robertson, and Switzler & McIntosh, for appellees.
   Ryan, C.

This is an appeal from an order appointing a receiver after a decree of foreclosure of certain mortgages and mechanics’ liens. On appeal the decree just referred to was affirmed. (Vide Hoagland v. Lowe, 39 Neb., 397.) The application for receiver was by petition. There appears to have been no answer or other adverse pleading filed, and the trial was upon affidavits and other evidence in writing. For this other evidence reference is made in ' the bill of exceptions herein contained to a bill of exceptions used in Hoagland v. Lowe, supra. If there was in another case evidence material and relevant to the matters presented by appeal in this, such evidence should have been embodied in the bill of exceptions settled herein. We are aware of no rulevwhich in effect authorizes a district judge for certain purposes in this court to consolidate entirely different actions or bills of exceptions in cases docketed independently of each other. As it is evident that to a consideration of all the evidence introduced reference must be had to the bill of exceptions in another case already determined, we must decline to consider this appeal upon the evidence. The petition, upon which alone this appeal must be determined, presented sufficient grounds for the appointment of a receiver in an ordinary action wherein a decree had already been entered from which an appeal had been taken. The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

Irvine, C., not sitting.  