The opinion
On Motion for Rehearing.
[4] This cause was filed in this court on March 31, 1914, and was set down for submission on May 27th. At the time that appellants were notified that the cause was to be submitted, no brief had, been filed for the reason that appellees had agreed that it should not be filed before July 1st. As soon as they were notified of the submission, appellants prepared a brief and filed the same in this court on May 16th and on same date served appellees with a printed copy thereof. Appellees, although this was 11 days before the day of submission, made no effort to file a brief and did not request time of this court in which to complete a brief, but sought to dismiss the cause because the briefs had not been filed in the district court and earlier filed in this court. On June 3, 1914,- this court refused to strike out the briefs of appellant, and gave its reasons for such refusal in a written opinion herein filed. On June 30th, 27 days after this court refused to strike out the briefs, appellees filed this motion for rehearing. No complaint is made of the opinion on the merits of the case, nor is it claimed that appellees were in any manner damaged by the judgment herein rendered on *379 the merits. The whole attack is made on the order overruling the motion to dismiss and that filed more than 15 days after the judgment denying a dismissal was entered. Ap-pellees had an abundance of time in which to file a brief both before and after submission, but failed and refused to do so, and it was indicated to them in our first opinion that time in which to prepare briefs would be granted if appellees desired it. They did not desire it, but preferred to risk their case on a motion to dismiss. They do not attack the opinion on the merits, and it must be presumed that they are satisfied therewith.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.