
    APPEALS.
    [Hamilton Circuit Court,
    January Term, 1898.]
    (Mamin, Eighth Circuit; Wilson, Second Circuit, and Parker, Sixth Circuit, JJ. sitting in Hamilton County Circuit Court.)
    Browne, Assignee, v. Wallace, Assignee, et al.
    t. Order of Court of Insolvency Confirming Sale, without Adjudication as to Priorities, not Appealable.
    An order of a court of insolvency, confirming a sale by a trustee, without adjudication as to priorities, merely finding proceedings to be regular and in accordance with the order for sale, is not a final order and appeal will not lie.
    2. Recital in Entry that Notice of Appeal was Given by a Trustee is Insufficient, where it does not Appear that Notice was in Writing,
    The recital in the journal entry of the court of insolvency that notice of appeal was given by a trustee who wished to appeal in his trust capacity, and, therefore, is not obliged to give bond, is not a compliance with sec. 6408, Rev. Stat., requiring that notice of appeal must be given m writing, inasmuch as it does not appear affirmatively that the notice referred to was in writing.
    5. Recital that Oral Notice was Given not a Compliance with Statute.
    In this case another personal entry contained the recital that an oral notice of appeal was given: Held, That this, on its face was not a compliance with the statute.
    
      
      Follett & Kelley, and F. W. Browne, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Witty & Wald, contra.
   Parker, J.

1. An order confirming a sale, where there is no adjudication as to priorities, but merely a finding that the proceedings for the .sale were regular and in accordance with the order for sale, is not a final order, and an appeal from it will not lie.

2. The recital in the journal entry of the court of insolvency that notice of appeal was given by a trustee who wished to appeal in his trust capacity and therefore is not obliged to give bond, is not a compliance with sec. 6408, Rev. Stat., requiring that notice of appeal must be given in writing, inasmuch as it does not appear affirmatively that the notice referred to in the journal entry was in writing. In this holding the court

follows the decision in Willis, Admr., v. Willis, 10 Circ. Dec., 000, a case from Washington C. H., decided by the circuit court for the second circuit and affirmed in the Supreme Court without report, 57 O. S., 668, where the question presented here was the only question made.

3. In the case at bar, another journal entry contained the recital that an oral notice of appeal was given. The court hold that this, on its face, was not a compliance with the statute.

Both judgments of common pleas in dismissing appeals from the court of insolvency, affirmed.  