On Motion for Rehearing.
The alleged conflict of the opinion of this court with those of the Supreme Court, pointed out in appellees’ motion for rehearing, are fanciful and unfounded, and probably intended more for the Supreme Court as jurisdictional matter on an application' for a writ of error, than for this court.
The motion filed by appellant is without merit, except possibly wherein it criticizes our opinion in failing to clearly pass on her ninth assignment of error. We intended to convey the idea that the second count of the petition was sustained in all *217its allegations of fraud made therein. One of those allegations is in regard to an attempted donation by W. T. Eldridge to W. T. Eldridge, Jr., ostensibly in trust for him and his two sisters, but really to deprive appellant of her one-half of the property so placed in trust, and with the intention to have the trust canceled after the divorce so as to invest W. T. Eldridge with title to the property. Those allegations are sufficient, and if proved would constitute a ground for setting aside the judgment. The ninth assignment of error is sustained.
With the exception noted, the two motions for rehearing are overruled.