Case ID: njl_86/html/0370-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Pee Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ANTHONY SINDONI, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. STEPHANO LA ROSA, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
    Argued March 6, 1914
    Decided March 6, 1914.
    On appeal from the Supreme Court, in which court the following per curiam was filed:
    The judgment of the District Court is affirmed. It was a fact case and properly submitted to the jury.
    For the plaintiff-respondent, Bourgeois & Coulomb.
    
    For the defendant-appellant, Garrison & Voorhees.
    
   Pee Curiam.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court affirming a judgment of the District Court of Atlantic City. The affirmance in the Supreme Court was put upon the ground that it was a fact case and was properly submitted to the jury. We concur in that view, and, consequently, as there is evidence to sustain the finding of the Supreme Court, upon familiar principles, it will not be disturbed.

For affirmance- — Th e Chancellor, Ci-iiee Justice, Teencitard, Parker, Bergen, Kalisch, Bogert, Vredenburgh, Congdon, White, Heppenheimer- JJ. 11.

For reversal — None.