Lando

This is an appeal from a judgment denying recovery on several policies of insurance against permanent or presumably permanent disability. Appellant’s case here rests on his claim that the evidence does not support the judgment. The first question to be disposed of is whether the bill of exceptions discloses an exception warranting such a review.

A jury was properly waived, and prior to the submission of the case the insured appellant moved for judgment in his favor and also moved for special findings. Appellant did not specify the ultimate facts desired to be found. His mere motion that the court make findings one way or another as to the ultimate facts is not a request for findings of specific facts sufficient in itself to warrant a review of the evidence. Seaboard Surety Co. v. U. S., 84 F.(2d) 348 , decided by this court on June 8, 1936. So far as advising the lower court of the claim that the evidence required a judgment in his favor, the situation is the same as if the appellant had made no more than a motion for such a judgment.

However, his form of request for findings complied with rule 42 of the District Court for the district below, as follows:

“Rule 42. — Findings. *…