Reporters’ Note. The opinions ensuing were not submitted to us by the clerk of the Appellate Court of the Fourth District, until he supplied us with the opinions filed during March, 1904. His reason for withholding them was that all but one were pending upon rehearing, and the remaining one was unimportant.

Jones & Addington.

#### Union Casualty and Surety Company v. Morris Hickey.

1. Brief—effect of appellee’s failure to file. No sufficient reason appearing to the co.urt why this case should be decided upon its merits, the same is, pursuant to its 29th rule, reversed because of the appellee’s failure to file a brief.

Action commenced before justice of the peace. Appeal from the City Court of East St. Louis; the Hon. Silas Cook, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the February term, 1903.

Reversed.

Opinion filed July 1, 1903.

Kramer, Creighton & Shaeffer, for appellant; Percy Werner, of counsel.

No appearance for appellee.

Per Curiam.

In this case appellee has filed no brief. Rule. 29 of this court is as follows: “ If the defendant in error or appellee shall fail to file his brief in compliance with these rules, *364the judgment or decree will be reversed proforma, unless the court, on examination of the record, shall deem it proper to decide the case on its merits.”

We have examined the record and do not deem it proper to depart from the usual course in such cases.

The judgment of the City Court of East St. Louis is reversed.

Reversed.