Helliwell v. Haberman‪.‬

This appeal comes before us in such a form that we cannot dispose of it with any certainty that we are not exceeding the limitations upon our jurisdiction. Preliminarily, the only parts of the testimony which the record contains are in all probability not those upon which the parties expect the appeal to be decided. The appellants designated certain pages of the testimony as those to be included. Rule 75(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. The appellee designated nothing on his part, and upon the record made up of the appellants designated pages alone we should probably be obliged to reverse the order on the merits. Possibly the appellee was not aware that he must make a designation; in any event he has argued the case as though the whole testimony was before us.Nor did the appellants themselves comply with the rule; they should have physically separated, and made part of the record, those pages which they had designated and no more. Rule 75(b). They did not do this; they have sent up the whole 300 pages of testimony, expecting us - we assume - to pick out the designated parts from the rest. This we decline to do; and we should in no case have considered the merits until the record had been properly prepared.