Case Name: Alexander Pollock, Respondent, v. Pennsylvania Iron Works Company, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1898-11-22
Citations: 157 N.Y. 699
Docket Number: 
Parties: Alexander Pollock, Respondent, v. Pennsylvania Iron Works Company, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 157
Pages: 699–700

Head Matter:
Alexander Pollock, Respondent, v. Pennsylvania Iron Works Company, Appellant.
Pollock v. Penn. Iron Works Go., 13 Misc. Rep. 194, affirmed.
(Argued October 17, 1898;
decided November 22, 1898.)
Appeal by permission from a judgment of the General Term of the late Court of Common Pleas for the city and county of New York, entered June 10, 1895, affirming a judgment of the General Term of the City Court of New York, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
William, H. Magimvis and John Cummins for appellant.
Charles He Hart Brower for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Cumam.
The legal effect of the omission of the defendant at the close of the testimony to move either for a dismissal of the complaint or the direction of a verdict in its favor was to consent to the submission of the case to the jury. We are, therefore, prevented from considering whether the defendant was entitled to judgment. None of the exceptions to the charge call for a reversal.
The judgment should be affirmed.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.