
    [Civil No. 1628.
    Filed February 25, 1920.]
    [187 Pac. 576.]
    MARIANA HERMAN, Personally and as Guardian of the Heirs of JULIUS HERMAN, Deceased, Appellant, v. DAVID BABBITT, C. J. BABBITT, GEORGE BABBITT and WILLIAM BABBITT, Copartners, Doing Business Under the Firm Name and Style of BABBITT BROTHERS, Appellees.
    Appeal and Error — Appeal will not Lie prom: Order Overruling Demurrer to Complaint. — An appeal will not lie from an order overruling a demurrer to the complaint, as it is not final.
    APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the County of Coconino. F. W. Perkins, Judge.
    Appeal dismissed.
    Messrs. Jones & Jones, for Appellant.
    Mr. Francis D. Crable, for Appellees.
   PER CURIAM.

The appeal in this case was taken from the following order:

“Both parties appearing by respective counsel, Francis D. Crable appearing for plaintiffs, and Jones & Jones for defendant, and defendant’s amended demurrer to the complaint is heard and by the court overruled. Defendant has until July 9, 1917, to plead further. Thereupon, jury is demanded by defendant, dated July 2, 1917.”

No further order seems to have been made in the lower court in the cause, and no final judgment appears in the record. We have held in Navajo-Apache Bank & Trust Co., W. H. Burbage & F. N. Nelson, Appellants, v. Caroline Desmont and William E. Wahl, Appellees, 17 Ariz. 472, 154 Pac. 206, that an order overruling a demurrer is not such a final determinative order as to be the subject of appeal and separate review.

To the same effect is the case of Hollingsworth v. Gazette Printing Co., ante, p. 51, 185 Pac. 359.

Upon the authority of the foregoing cases, this appeal is dismissed.  