
    Z. E. Binns v. J. J. Adams et al.
    
    
      Peaotice — No Question in Supreme Court. Where the action of the trial court in overruling the motion for a new trial is not assigned for error, no question is properly raised in this court for its consideration.
    
      Error from Chautauqua District Court.
    
    Action by Binns against Adams and another. Plaintiff brings here for review a judgment in favor of defendants. A sufficient statement of the case is contained in the opinion herein, filed January 5, 1895.
    
      
      J. D. MeBrian, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Asp, Shartel & Cotlingham, for defendants in error.
   Per Curiam:

The only errors complained of in the petition in error relate to matters on the trial for which a new trial was prayed for. The action of the trial court in overruling the motion for a new trial is not assigned for error; therefore no question is properly raised in this court for our consideration. (Carson v. Funk, 27 Kas. 524; Clark v. Schnur, 40 id. 72; City of McPherson v. Manning, 43 id. 129.) The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.-  