
    APPEAL.
    [Hamilton Circuit Court,
    October Term, 1899.]
    Smith, Swing and Gifien, JJ.
    Betts v. Shields et al.
    Appeal — Action for Recovery of Money.
    The answer of an administrator in an action for the recovery of money ©mly, denying that his intestate received the money, does not change the issue and the action is-not appealable.
    Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton county.
    
      Win. Hartley Pugk, for plaintiff.
    
      Ellis B. Gregg, contra.
   Giffen, J.

The motion of plaintiff to dismiss the appeal of the defendant, Win. Hartley Pugh, administrator, in each of the above cases, is sustained for the reason that the only issue made in the petition as against him is for the recovery of money only; and his answer, which merely denies that his intestate received the money, does not change the issue.  