Case Name: Charles Kranichfelt, Respt, v. John Slatterly, App'lt
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1894-06-20
Citations: 60 N.Y. St. Rep. 850
Docket Number: 
Parties: Charles Kranichfelt, Respt, v. John Slatterly, App’lt.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 60
Pages: 850–850

Head Matter:
Charles Kranichfelt, Respt, v. John Slatterly, App’lt.
(New York City Court, General Term,
Filed June 20, 1894.)
Appeal—Charge.
Where the printed case does not contain the charge or any exception thereto, the appellate court will assume that there was no error in the submission of the case to the jury.
James P. Campbell for app’lt; F. P. Trauiman, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Newburger, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon the verdict of a jury in favor of the plaintiff. This action is brought against the defendant as a surety for work to be done under two contracts for the .plaintiff by one Lynch, but which the latter failed to complete. The answer of the defendant was a general denial. On the trial, plaintiff offered in evidence the contracts between himself and Lynch, and also bond given by the defendant. The defendant denied having executed the bond or that he acknowledged the same before the notary. There is no_ dispute as to failure on the part of Lynch to carry out the contracts, and therefore the only question remaining was: Did the defendant- execute the bond sued on ? This was a mere question of fact and was properly submitted to the jury.
The judges charge or any exception thereto, not appearing in the printed case, we assume that there was no error on the part of the trial justice in his submission of the case of the jury. There appears to be no error in the admission or rejection of testimony that would warrant us in disturbing the judgment. Judgment affirmed with costs. Fitzsimons and Conlan, J. J., concur.