
    Charles Roper et al. v. Mary C. Ferris.
    New Teiae — Overruling Motion — Assignment of Error. Assignments of error alleged to have ocoúrred on the trial cannot be considered in the supreme court, unless the overruling of the motion for a new trial is assigned as error. (Landauer v. Hoagland, 41 Kas. 520, followed.)
    
      Error from Washington District Court.
    
    The opinion states the case.
    
      Joseph G. Lowe, for plaintiffs in error.
    
      Omar Powell, for defendant in error.
   Opinion by

Green, C.:

The plaintiffs in error in this case ask a reversal of the judgment of the district court of "Washington county, upon seven assignments of error, all of which, as is alleged, occurred during the trial; but the overruling of the motion for a new trial is not assigned as error. This is necessary to have such assignments of error considered in this court. (Landauer v. Hoagland, 41 Kas. 520; Clark v. Schnur, 40 id. 72; Carson v. Funk, 27 id. 524.)

The judgment of the district court should be affirmed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

All the Justices concurring.  