
    Speidel v. Smith.
    Practice in the supreme court.
    
      Appeal from Henry District Court.
    
    Friday, April 19.
    Action for an injunction against the defendant as road supervisor, to restrain him from opening a road. The application is based upon allegations that no road has been established, and no right acquired by the public in any way. A temporary injunction was granted, and afterwards, upon motion of the defendant, was dissolved; and afterwards, upon hearing, decree was rendered for defendant. The plaintiff appeals.
    
      H A B. Ambles', for appellant.
    
      Woolson A Babb, for appellee.
   Adams, J.

No motion or order was made for the trial of the case upon written evidence, and there is no assignment of errors. We have repeatedly held that such a case presents nothing- for our determination. We may say, however, that a majority of the court are of the opinion that the finding of the court below that a road had been established by prescription is correct.

The decree of the court below must be

Affirmed.  