Gabelein v. Plaenker

Stewart, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. From an examination of the record, it appears the Superior Court of Baltimore city had jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the suit, and the parties litigant appeared; issues were made, a trial had before a jury, verdict rendered, motion for a new trial overruled by the Court, judgment rendered on the verdict, and execution issued. ⁶⁴ The defendant moved to strike out the judgment and quash the fieri faeias; no reasons appear to have been assigned' to sustain the motion. The brief of the appellant filed in this Court relies upon certain grounds of objection to the proceedings in the SupeT rior Court, but which do not appear to have been made during the trial, before the verdict, nor on the motion to strike out the judgment and quash the fieri facias, but are disclosed for the. first time in the application for the writ of error. The record no where shows that the Superior Court pronounced any judgment upon these questions.

Under the authority of the 18th section of the 4th Article of the Constitution, this Court has provided rules, to have the force of law, until changed by the Court or the Legislature. They may be found in 29 Md., 1 -8. By the first rule, specially applicable to writs of error, and simplifying the form of proceeding, it is required in such cases, that in the petition for the removal of the record, the points