
    George P. Endicott v. Herbert E. Ellis and Sam Lee, and Sam Lee v. Herbert E. Ellis and George P. Endicott.
    (Filed July 17, 1902.)
    
      Error from the District Court of Kay County; before Bay-ard T. Hainer, Trial Judge.
    
    
      S. H. Harris, for plaintiff in error.
    
      E. B. Guthrey, attorney for Ellis.
    
      Dale & Bierer, for defendants in error.
    
      J. B. Scott, for plaintiff in error.
    
      S. H. Hams, attorney for Endicott.
    
      E. B. Guthrey, attorney for Ellis.
    
      Dale & Bierer, for defendants in error.
    On rehearing. Reversed and remanded.
   Per CuriaM:

This case raises no new questions which were not considered in the case of Anderson v. Ferguson, just decided, and for the reasons given in that case, these cases will be reversed, and a new trial granted, and the lower court is directed to proceed in conformity with the views expressed in the case of Anderson v. Ferguson, supra. It is further ordered that the parties be placed in the same occupancy of the land that they were in at the time of the commencement of this action, and to so remain until the further order of the district court, or the judge thereof; but this order is not intend* ed to preclude the parties or either of them from pursuing any other remedy which either may have in any of the courts of the territory.

Hainer, J., who presided in the court below, not sitting; Irwin, J., absent.  