Case ID: nys_36/html/1125-01.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

FARRELL, Respondent, v. HAEGER, Appellant. FLIEGMAN, Respondent, v. MENDEL, Appellant.
    (Common Pleas of New York City and County,
    Additional General Term.
    December 27, 1895.)
    Actions by William A. Farrell against Anna G. Haeger, and by Sigmund Fliegman against Samuel Mendel.
    Jacob Fromme, for appellant Haeger.
    Mashbir & Cukor, for appellant Mendel.
    James C. De La Mare, for respondent Farrell.
    Morris H. Gotlieb. for respondent Fliegman.
   PER CURIAM.

The appeal in these cases brings up for review questions of fact only. The judgment in both cases seems to he 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 and the weight to be given to their testimony. The judgment in each case should be affirmed, with costs to respondent.