
    Howard, Appellant, v. Swissvale Borough.
    
      Appeals — Assignments of erorr — Statement of errors.
    
    An appeal in an equity case will be quashed where the appellant fails to comply with Rule 11 relating to assignments of error in connection with Equity Rule 92, relating to the filing in the court below of a brief statement of errors.
    Argued Oct. 22, 1906.
    January 7, 1907:
    Appeal, No. 18, Oct. T., 1906, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. No. 2, Allegheny Ob., Oct. T., 1904, No. 1,762, dismissing bill in equity in case of Frank A. Howard v. Swissvale Borough.
    Before Mitchell, C. J., Fell, Brown, Mestrezat, Elicin and Stewart, JJ.
    Appeal quashed.
    Bill in equity for an injunction.
    From the record it appeared that the appellant had not filed in the court below as required by Rule 92, a brief statement of errors, and that the assignments of error filed in the Supreme Court were not based upon any errors stated of record in the court below.
    
      John P. Hunter, for appellant.
    
      Alex. A. Patterson, of Lyon, MeKee & Mitchell, with him Joseph F. Mayhugh and William Findlay Brown, for appellee.
   Per Curiam,

The appellant’s failure to comply with Rule 11 and equity rule 92 of this court compels us to quash this appeal.

Appeal quashed.  