
    Jones et al. v. Lucas, Trustee.
    [No. 10,643.
    Filed November 19, 1920.]
    
      Appeal. — Briefs.—Sufficiency.—Where the only error relied on for reversal is the overruling of the motion for new trial, and appellants’ brief fails to set out the motion or the substance thereof, the brief is insufficient to present any question for consideration.
    From Huntington Circuit Court; George M. Eberhart, Judge.
    Action between William O. Jones and others and Charles K. Lucas, trustee. From the judgment rendered, the former appeal.
    
      Affirmed.
    
    
      Charles R. Haller, for appellants.
    
      Charles K. Lucas and Herbert B. Spencer, for appellee.
   Per Curiam.

The brief filed by appellants in this case is insufficient to present any question for our consideration. The only error relied upon is the action of the court in overruling the motion for a new trial. The brief wholly fails to set out said motion or the substance thereof. On the' authority of Pugh, Admr., v. Cleveland, etc., R. Co. (1916), 184 Ind. 350, 110 N. E. 193, the judgment is affirmed.  