
    Kathleen Hatzfeld, and T. S. Hatzfeld, Plaintiffs in Error, v. O. M. Davis, Defendant in Error.
    
    Division B.
    Decision filed April 5, 1930.
    
      E. E. Graves, for Plaintiffs in Error;
    
      jShackleford, Ivy, Farrior & Shannon, for Defendant in Error.
   Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore considered, Qrdered and adjudged by the Court that the ¡said judgment of the circuit court' be, and the same- is ¡'¡hereby, affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Strum and Buford, J. J., concur!  