
    SLAUGHTER v. KIRKPATRICK.
    (Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. El Paso.
    May 15, 1913.
    Rehearing Denied June 5, 1913.)
    Appeal and Error (§ 7431 — Assignments op Error — Reference to Motion eor New Trial.
    Assignments of error not referring to that part of the motion for new trial in which the error was complained of will be considered as waived.
    [Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 2999, 3011; Dec. Dig. § 743.]
    Appeal from Martin County Court; A. C. Eidson, Judge.
    Action between C. C. Slaughter and L. C. Kirkpatrick. Judgment for Kirkpatrick, and Slaughter appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Howard & De Armond, of Midland, and G. G. Wright, of Dallas, for appellant. A. L. Green, of Stanton, for appellee.
    
      
      E'or other cases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No. Series & Rep’r Indexes
    
   McKENZIE, j.

This is an appeal from the county court of Martin county. The cause was tried by the court and jury. The verdict and judgment was in favor of appellee, and appellant filed a motion for new trial.

We find from examination of appellant’s assignments of error, as filed in the trial court, that no mention or reference is made to the motion for new trial. This is not a compliance with the rules which govern this court, and the assignments will be considered as waived. Our holding herein is in conformity with the following authorities: Davidson v. Patton, 149 S. W. 757; Murphy v. Earl, 150 S. W. 486; Railway Co. v. Ledbetter, 153 S. W. 646; Railway Co. v. Gray, 154 S. W. 229; Imperial Irr. Co. v. McKenzie, 157 S. W. 751; Konz v. Henson, 156 S. W. 593; Railway Co. v. Lee, 157 S. W. 748; Cain v. Delaney, 157 S. W. 751; Irving v. T. & P. Ry. Co., 157 S. W. 752. The last five cases are recent opinions of this court and not yet officially reported.

An examination of the record fails to disclose error of a fundamental nature, and the judgment, accordingly, is affirmed.  