¶1 Tbe plaintiff appeals from the refusal of the court to enter judgment for $1,400, the sum which the jury found the bankrupt bad invested in the improvement of bis father’s land. In Michael v. Moore, 157 N. C., 462, where the husband bad invested funds in the improvements of bis wife’s land, the Court did not expressly pass upon the point, but by analogy to the charge allowed for betterments, Rev., 655, we think tbat the land should be subjected to a lien for the increased value added to it, and no further. It may be tbat if the bankrupt was solvent, there should be judgment against him personally for the $1,400, with interest from date of the wrongful and fraudulent subtraction of tbat sum from bis assets. But tbat point is not presented.
¶2 As to tbe questions raised upon tbe defendant’s appeal, we think tbat in view of tbe full discussion on tbe three previous appeals, and on tbe trial below in tbis case, as to tbe allegations of fact upon which tbe defendants’ exceptions are based, no further discussion is necessary.
¶3 As to both appeals we find
¶4 No error.