
    JOSEPH MORGAN, by his Guardian, etc., Appellant, v. MARY J. SMITH, Administratrix, etc., Appellant.
    Kansas City Court of Appeals,
    May 6, 1907.
    APPELLATE PRACTICE: Abstract: Motion for New Trial: Record Proper. Where the record proper fails to show the filing and existence of motion for new trial, there is nothing but the pleadings and judgment before the court, and if they are without error the judgment will be affirmed.
    Appeal from Carroll Circuit Court. — Hon. John P. Butler, Judge.
    Affirmed.
    
      Lozier, Morris & Atwood and Jones & Gonlcling for appellant.
    
      F. 8. Hudson, John H. Taylor and Gonlcling & Rea for respondent.
   BROADDUS, P. J.

Both parties appealed from the judgment of the court. Neither party files an abstract. The defendant besides bringing a transcript of the judgment and order granting an appeal has furnisbed a copy of tbe pleadings and bill of exceptions. There is nothing to show by the record proper that any motion for a new trial was ever filed. Such being the case, there is nothing before the court but the pleadings and the judgment. And furthermore there is nothing to show, except in the bill of exceptions, that: said motion was ever filed. This case is like that of the City of St. Charles ex rel. v. Deemar, 174 Mo. 122.

Finding no error in the record proper, the cause is affirmed.

All concur.  