Case Name: Charles Doll, App'lt, v. Frederick R. Jorgenson, Resp't
Court: Brooklyn City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1892-06-27
Citations: 46 N.Y. St. Rep. 968
Docket Number: 
Parties: Charles Doll, App’lt, v. Frederick R. Jorgenson, Resp’t.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 46
Pages: 968–968

Head Matter:
City Court of Brooklyn—General Term.
Filed June 27, 1892.
Charles Doll, App’lt, v. Frederick R. Jorgenson, Resp’t.
Appeal from judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon verdict, and from order denying motion for a new trial.
Action to recover money alleged to have heen fraudulently obtained from' plaintiff while defendant was acting as his agent.
M. L. Towns, for app’lt; Horace Graves, fur resp’t.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The case shows that only a single question of fact was litigated at the trial, whether or not the defendant acted as the agent of the plaintiff in the sale of certain real estate in this city. The testimony was conflicting, and the jury found that the defendant was not such agent. No exception was taken to the charge, and there is no certificate that the case contains all the. testimony. We have examined the record and find no error.
Judgment and order denying new trial affirmed, with costs.
Clement, Ch. J., and Osborne, J., concur.