
    John Craig Anderson et al. v. The Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Company et al.
    
    1. Excessive Judgment — Appeal — New Trial. The objection that the judgment is excessive in amount will not be considered on appeal where it was not raised by motion for a new trial.
    2. Supreme Court — No Opinion, When. Under § 16, chapter 96, Laws of 1895, an opinion by the supreme court need not be prepared and filed in a cause where that court deems it unnecessary to do so.
    
      Error from Lyon District Court.
    
    AotioN by Anderson and others against the Connecticut Mxúnal Life Insurance Company and others. On the judgment rendered error is brought.
    
      J. G. Hutchison, for plaintiffs in error.
    
      E. IF. Cxmningham, for defendants in error.
   Per Curiam:

This was a foreclosure proceeding in which the mortgagors and the second mortgagee were defendants. The court determined that the mortgage first made was a prior, subsisting mortgage, and declared it to be a first lien upon the mortgaged land.

Several objections are made to the rulings of the court, but in them we find nothing of a substantial character, or which is deserving of special comment. There was abundant legal evidence to sustain the finding of the court, and the claim that the amount of recovery was too large is not available for the reason that it was not alleged as a cause for a new trial.

Under the recent act of the legislature a full opinion and syllabus are not required in every case, and are only required to be prepared and published where the decisions will add something to the jurisprudence of the state and are deemed to be of sufficient value for publication. (Laws of 1895, ch. 96, § 16.) The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.  