#### M. A. GARDNER and J. J. MITCHELL v. L. M. WARING.

(Filed 14 October, 1925.)

Appeal from Daniels, J., at April Term, 1925, of Waice.

Affirmed.

This was a motion made by defendant, L. M. Waring, to set aside the judgment rendered against' him 12 May, 1924. So much of the judgment rendered against him for the money demand is not resisted, but the following judgment by default as to fraud is asked to be set aside, viz.: “It further appearing that the plaintiffs have alleged in their complaint that the defendant obtained from them certain property, to wit, shipments of cattle and hogs by false and fraudulent representations, and the indebtedness claimed by the plaintiffs was incurred in that way. It is therefore adjudged that the plaintiffs are entitled to, and they should have, judgment by default and inquiry as to said allegations as to false and fraudulent representations, and it is so adjudged, and that said inquiry shall be held at the next succeeding term of this court.”

J ones & J ones and J. W. Bailey for plaintiffs.

Douglass & Douglass and J ones, J ones & Horton for defendant.

*866Per Curiam.

We have beard tbe arguments, read tbe record and briefs witb care, and can find no prejudicial or reversible error. There was sufficient competent evidence to support tbe material findings of fact by tbe learned judge in tbe court below wbo beard tbis motion. Upon tbe findings of fact, wbicb we are bound by, we think tbe judgment of tbe court below correct. There is no new or novel principle of law involved in tbe controversy. Tbe judgment of tbe court below is

Affirmed.