Case ID: ny-st-rep_70/html/0901-15.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William A. Farrell, Resp’t, v. Anna C. Haeger, App’lt. Sigmund Fliegman, Resp’t, v. Samuel Mendel, App’lt.
    N. Y. C. P.,
    December 27, 1895.
    
      Jacob JFromme'. for app’lt Haeger; Mashbir & Gukor, for app’lt Mendel; James O. De La Mare, for resp’t Farrell; Morris H. Botlieb, for resp’t Fliegman.
   Per Curiam.

The appeal in these cases brings up for review questions of fact only. The judgment in both cases seems to be supported by evidence, and, although the evidence was contradicted by the respective defendants, it was peculiarly the province of the court having the witnesses before it to determine the credibility of the witnesses aud the weight to he given to their testimony. The judgment in each case should be affirmed, with costs to respondent.