#### Henry S. Deitrich v. Sarah Waldron.

Practice—exceptions must be preserved to rulings to be reviewed. The Supreme Court will not review the rulings of the court below on the admission or rejeo*116tion of evidence, the allowing or refusing of motions, the refusal to grant a new trial, etc., unless such rulings are excepted to, and the exceptions preserved in the record by bill of exceptions or otherwise.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. W. K. McAllister, Judge, presiding.

This was an action on the case by Sarah Waldron against Henry S. Deitrich, for fraud and deceit, practiced by the defendant on the plaintiff in the sale of certain real estate, consisting, as was alleged, in certain false and fraudulent representations respecting the property, the title, and its location and surroundings, as giving it value.

A trial was had resulting in a verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $641.84.

Among the errors assigned are, that the court erred in the admission and in the rejection of evidence, and in refusing to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial.

Mr. John Dunlevy, for the appellant.

Mr. Rufus King, for the appellee.

Per Curiam :

It has ever been the practice of this, and it is believed of all common law appellate courts, never to review the ruling of the lower court, on the admission or rejection of evidence, the allowing or refusing of motions, the refusal to grant a new trial, etc., unless such decision is excepted to and the exception appears in the record by bill of exceptions or otherwise. No such exceptions were taken in this case, or if they were it does not appear from the record. This being so, we can not review the decisions of the court assigned for error, and the judgment of the court below must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.