
    SOVEREIGN CAMP, WOODMEN OF THE WORLD v. WOOD.
    (No. 1075.)
    (Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. El Paso.
    Feb. 12, 1920.
    Rehearing Denied March 18, 1920.)
    Appeal and erbob i@=>773 (4) — -In absence of BRIEFS AND FUNDAMENTAL EBBOB JUDGMENT AFFIBMED.
    'Where no' briefs are filed by either party, and the trial court had jurisdiction over the subject-matter of the suit, the judgment below will be affirmed, where no fundamental error is apparent of record.
    Appeal from District Court, Erath County; J. A. Johnson, Special Judge.
    Action by Edna Wood against the Sovereign Camp, Woodmen of the World, and another. Judgment for plaintiff, and the named defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      Lattimore, Bouldin & Lattimore, of Ft. Worth, for appellant.
    Chandler & Pannill, of Stephenville, for appellee.
   WALTHALL, J.

Edna Wood brought this suit against Sovereign Camp, Woodmen of the World, and A. C. Wood, to recover upon an application and beneficiary certificate of life insurance issued to her deceased husband, R. C. Wood, and made payable to her, as beneficiary, in the sum of $1,500. A. C. Wood was made defendant as claiming some interest in the certificate. Sovereign Camp, Woodmen of the World, answered by plea of the jurisdiction, general demurrer, general denial, and allegations that R. C. Wood in his applications for life insurance had made as true certain representations, warranties, and «statements, but which were alleged to be untrue, and sought to avoid liability on that account. A. C. Wood answered, adopting the allegations in the plaintiffs petition, and to the effect that he has assigned whatever interest he had in the certificate to Edna Wood and that she was entitled to recover whatever was found to be due under the certificate, but that if the assignment was for any reason invalid, in that event, he ashed judgment for the amount found to be due him, with interest.

Judgment was rendered in favor of Edna Wood and A. C. Wood, on his cross-action, in the sum of $1,755, from which appellant took an appeal.

There are no briefs filed in this court by either party. The trial court had jurisdiction over the subject-matter of the suit. We find no fundamental error apparent of record.

The judgment is affirmed. 
      &wkey;aPor other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     