
    TODD, Respondent, v. BURGER et al., Appellants.
    (141 N. W. 515.)
    Appeal — Assignments of Error — Affirmance.
    No assignments of error toeing found in appellant’s brief, judgment will -be affirmed.
    (Opinion filed May 24, 1913.)
    Appeal from Circuit Court, Brule County. Lion. Frank B. Smith, Judge.
    Action by Charles Todd against Fred P. Burger and another. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal.
    Affirmed.
    
      
      John T. Milek, for Appellants.
    
      Brown & Brown, for Respondent.
    Appellant’s procedure on this appeal has been -so faulty that he is not entitled to have the merits of the case considered, and the judgment should be affirmed because of irregularities in procedure alone. Chapter 15 Law-s 1911; State v. Doran, 134 N. W- S3- _ '
    _ His brief at no point either in the purported statement of facts or in the argument discloses any assignment -of errors, and for this reason alone the judgment should be affirmed. Williams Bros. Lumber -Co. v. Kelley, 23 S. D. 582.
   McCOY, J.

In this case there are no assignments of error contained in appellant’s brief. The record is .clearly within the rule heretofore announced by this court in State v. Doran, 28 S. D. 486, 134 N. W. 53; Dring v. St. Lawrence Tp., 140 N. W. 264; Sanford et al. v. Helgerson, 141 N. W. 390.

The judgment and order appealed from are affirmed.  