EVELYN CROFT, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. THOMAS W. BUNTING, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT; EVELYN CROFT, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. THEODORE C. TIEDEKEN, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT; EVELYN CROFT, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. WILLIAM H. TIEDEKEN, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT; EVELYN CROFT, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. EARL W. TWITCHELL, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT

Per Curiam.

We have carefully examined the record in these cases and the briefs and argument of counsel and can only conclude that the questions of fact were property found and the questions of law were correctly settled by the learned trial judge. The judgment is affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Case, Bodine, Heher, Perskie, Poster, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Walker, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.