#### CHLOE TINSLEY v. CITY OF WINSTON-SALEM.

(Filed 23 November, 1927.)

Civil actiou before Finley, J., at February Term) 1927, of Forsyth.

This was a1 civil action for damages for personal injury sustained by plaintiff by reason of slipping into an uncovered or unguarded hole or excavation on North Elm Street. There was judgment for the plaintiff and the defendant appealed, assigning errors.

Wallace & Wells for plaintiff.

Fred M. Parrish for defendant.

Per Curiam.

This case was considered by the Court upon a former appeal, which is reported in 192 N. 0., p. 597. This decision becomes *809tbe law of tbe case so far as tbe subsequent trial is concerned. Nobles v. Davenport, 185 N. C., 162; Mfg. Co. v. Hodgins, 192 N. C., 577.

After a careful examination of tbe record and briefs of counsel for tbe parties, tbe court is of tbe opinion that no error of law was committed upon tbe trial, and tbe judgment of tbe trial court is upheld.

No error.