Case Name: WHITE ROCK LIME & CEMENT CO. v. DICK
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1894-06-20
Citations: 29 N.Y.S. 681
Docket Number: 
Parties: WHITE ROCK LIME & CEMENT CO. v. DICK.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 29
Pages: 681–681

Head Matter:
WHITE ROCK LIME & CEMENT CO. v. DICK.
(City Court of New York, General Term.
June 20, 1894.)
Appeal—Review—Weight op Evidence.
A verdict rendered on conflicting evidence will not be disturbed on appeal.
Appeal from trial term.
Action by the White Bock Lime & Cement Company against Robert Dick. There was a judgment in favor of plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before FITZSIMONS, NEWBURGER, and CONLAN, JJ.
Charles A. Flammer, for appellant.
Kurzman & Frankenheimer, for respondent.

Opinion:
NEWBURGER, J.
.This action is brought to recover for goods •sold and delivered. The answer is a general denial. It appears that the defendant, a builder, erected eight buildings on the south side of Ninetieth street, between Ninth and Tenth avenues, in this city. Plaintiff claims that the goods sold and delivered were used in the plastering work of the said building. Defendant concedes that the goods were used on the buildings, but claims that the credit was given to one Burke, with whom the defendant had a •contract to do the plastering. There was a conflict between plaintiff's and defendant's witnesses, and therefore it was the duty of the trial justice to submit the question to the jury. That the judge's charge was a proper and fair one is apparent, as the appellant has failed to print the same or call our attention to any exception thereto. The case fails to disclose any errors on the trial. The judgment must therefore be affirmed, with costs. All •concur.