
    Flippins et al. v. West Terre Haute Lumber Company.
    [No. 10,562.
    Filed November 23, 1920.
    Rehearing denied March 17, 1921.]
    
      Appeal. — Presenting Questions for Review. — Error in Conclusions of Law. — Appellant cannot present for review the question of error in the conclusions of law through a motion for new trial, but must except to the conclusions and assign as error that the court erred therein.
    From Vigo Superior Court; John S. Jordan, Special Judge.
    Action between Ira J. Flippins and others and the West Terre Haute Lumber Company. From a judgment for the latter, the former appeal.
    
      Affirmed.
    
    
      Samuel S. Gobm and Perry Smith, for appellants.
    
      Williams & Moore, for appellee.
   McMahan, J.

The only question which appellant attempted to present which has any merit, is that the court erred in its conclusions of law.

.Instead of excepting to the conclusions of law and assigning as error in this court, that the court erred in its conclusions of law, appellant seeks to present the question through her motion for a new trial. This can not be done. Midland R. Co. v. Dickason (1892), 130 Ind. 164, 29 N. E. 775.

Judgment affirmed.  