
    ROGERS et al. v. PENOBSCOT MINING CO. et al.
    An abstract on appeal of 869 pages which, might easily have been condensed to 100 pages will not be considered.
    Corson, J., dissenting.
    (Opinion filed, July 1, 1910.)
    Appeal From Circuit Court, Rawrence County. Hon. Wiuuiam G. Rice;, Judge.
    Action by Burt Rogers and others against the Penobscot Mining Company and others. From a judgment for plaintiffs and an order denying a new trial, defendants appeal.
    Affirmed.
    
      McLcmghlin & Ogden and A. J. Ploivman, for appellants. Chambers Kellar, Eben W. Martin, and Norman T. Mason, for respondents.
   McCOY, J.

Whatever merit there may be in appellants’ contention is concealed beneath an avalanche of immaterial matter contained in 869 pages, termed “abstract,” which, with some little labor, might easily have been condensed within 100 pages. For all the reasons stated in Farrar v. Yankton Rand & Investment Co., 23 S. D. 525, 122 N. W. 585, and State v. McCallum, 23 S. D. 528, 122 N. W. 586, and a great many more of the same character, the court has not considered appellant’s abstract.

The judgment of the circuit court and the order denying a new trial are affirmed.

CORSON, J., dissenting.  