
    Successors of Bianchi v. Sein.
    Motion- to approve statement of tlie case.
    No. 8
    Decided November 23, 1908.
    Statement of the Case — Bill of Exceptions — Appeoval Thereof. — A bill of exceptions, statement of the case, or statement of facts, must be settled by the judge or judicial officer before whom the case was heard in the first instance, and in case such judge or judicial officer should die, be removed from office, become disqualified, absent himself from the Island or refuse to settle the bill of /exceptions, statement of the case or statement of facts, such documents must be approved by the person succeeding such judge or ■judicial officer in office, or by the judge of the nearest district court.
    Id. — Approval by Supreme Court — Propriety Thereof. — The Supreme Court may be resorted to only in the case referred to in section 67 of the rules— that is tOosay, in case the judge or judicial officer before whom the trial of a case was had fails or refuses to settle and sign the bill of exceptions or statement of the ease — and this is not so in the casé at bar.
    Tlie facts are stated in tlie decision.
    
      Mr. Manuel F. Bossy for petitioner.
    The respondent did not appear.
   The settlement of a bill of exceptions or approval of a statement of facts must be made directly by the judge or judicial officer who took cognizance of the matter in the first in-dance, and if such judge or judicial official dies, is removed from office, becomes disqualified, is absent from the Island or refuses to settle such bill of exceptions or approve such statement of facts, they shall be settled and approved in such manner as the Supreme Court may by its orders or rules direct, according to the provisions of section 219 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Buie 68 of the Eegulations of this court provides that when ■a judge or judicial officer before whom a case has been tried, is included in any of the foregoing cases, such bill of exceptions or statement of facts may be settled by the successor in office of such judge or , judicial officer, or by the judge of the nearest adjoining district,-and that application may be made to the Supreme Court for the approval of such documents, in the case referred to in section 67 of said rules — that is to say, in the event that the judge or judicial officer before whom the case was tried should neglect or refuse to settle and sign the said bill of exceptions or statement of facts, in which* case this is not included.

It is held that a review of the decision of this court of the '20th instant does not lie, and it is ordered that the orders stand as made.

Motion dismissed.

Justices Hernández, Figueras, MacLeary and Wolf concurred.

Mr. Chief Justice Quinones did not take partin the decision of this case.  