NATIONAL METROPOLITAN BANK v. LINCOLN

NATIONAL METROPOLITAN BANK v. LINCOLN. Appeal and Eeeoe. Where judgment ig entered by the lower court upon the mandate of this court, without objection or exception by the losing party, and without any offer by him of evidence necessitating a new trial, there is nothing, presented for this court to review on an appeal by him from sueh¡ judgment, and the judgment will be affirmed. No. 2270. Submitted April 6, 1911. Decided May 1, 1911. Hearing on. an appeal by an intervening claimant from at judgment of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia dismissing its petition of intervention in an attachment proceeding, in accordance with a previous mandate of this court. Affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion. Mr. Jackson H. Ralston, Mr. Frederick L. Siddons, and Mr.. William E. Richardson for the appellant. Mr. Percival M. Brown, Mr. Charles W. Clagett, and Mr.. Walter R. Guy for the appellee. [MAJORITY — Mr. Justice Van Orsdel] Mr. Justice Van Orsdel delivered the opinion of the Court r This case was here on a former appeal. 35 App. D. C, 363, 30 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1215. Eor a review of the facts, reference is^ made to the opinion filed therein. The present appeal is from a judgment entered in 'favor of the appellee upon motion of his counsel for the dismissal of appellant’s intervening petition, and for judgment upon the mandate of this court. It does not appear from the record that appellant offered to produce additional evidence necessitating a new trial, or that any objection was interposed to the entry of judgment upon, the mandate, or exception taken to the action of the court in. granting the motion. In the absence of any exception properly appearing in the record, there is nothing presented for this, court to review. Young v. Martin, 8 Wall. 354, 19 L. ed. 418. The judgment of the court below is affirmed, with costs, and. it is so ordered. Affirmed.