#### William Kontos, Plaintiff in Error, v. William Clemens et al., Defendants in Error.

Gen. No. 21,197.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

Municipal Court of Chicago, § 31 * —when judgment affirmed on appeal. On writ of error to reverse a judgment of the Municipal Court of Chicago in a fourth-class contract action, where a stenographic report containing all the errors assigned has been stricken because not seasonably filed, there is nothing to be passed on by the Appellate Court, and the judgment will be affirmed.

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph P. Rafferty, Judge, presiding.

Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1915.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed January 27, 1916.

Statement of the Case.

Action by William Kontos, plaintiff, against William Clemens, Robert McLaughlin, Mathew Kersting, Charles F. Healy and others, defendants, in the Municipal Court of Chicago, to recover on a contract. The action was of the fourth class. The court found in favor of all the defendants except Robert McLaughlin. To reverse a judgment for such defendants, plaintiff prosecutes this writ of error.

Beauregard F. Moseley, for plaintiff in error.

Winston, Payne, Strawn & Shaw, for defendants in error, Kersting and Healy.

Charles V. Barrett, for defendant in error, William Clemens.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.