
    BANCROFT v. BOARD OF REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN.
    Appeal and Error — Demurrer—Judgment—Necessity.
    Want of a final judgment in a personal injury action is fatal to the review of the ease on error and, in the absence of any showing that judgment had been later entered, the writ must be dismissed.
    
      Error to Washtenaw; Kinne, J.
    Submitted April 4, 1916.
    (Docket No. 4.)
    Decided June 23, 1916.
    Case by Mary Bancroft against the board of regents of the University of Michigan and another for personal injuries. Judgment for defendants sustaining separate demurrers. Plaintiff brings error.
    Writ dismissed.
    
      Albert E. Sherman, for appellant.
    
      Cavanaugh & Burke, for appellee.
   Per Curiam.

Plaintiff filed her suit to recover damages for personal injuries which she claims to have incurred and which she avers were occasioned by the negligence of defendants. The defendants demurred to the declaration, and after argument the same was sustained. This was followed by the issuance of a writ of error from this court without any final judgment having been entered in the trial court, and, so far as the record shows, we are not advised that a final judgment has since been entered therein. Under this state of facts the practice will not permit of a review of the case in this court. Green v. Eaton Probate Judge, 40 Mich. 244; Delaney v. Lumber Co., 144 Mich. 351 (108 N. W. 77); Barribeau v. City of Detroit, 146 Mich. 392 (109 N. W. 665); In re Vetter’s Estate, 162 Mich. 109 (127 N. W. 306).

The writ will be dismissed, with costs to appellee.  