Case Name: Bailey et al. v. Gluth
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1892-07-22
Citations: 19 N.Y.S. 945
Docket Number: 
Parties: Bailey et al. v. Gluth.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 19
Pages: 945–945

Head Matter:
Bailey et al. v. Gluth.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.
July 22, 1892.)
Appeals from Justice’s Court—Weight of Evidence.
Where there is any evidence to support a judgment of a justice of the peace, the supreme court cannot disturb it as being contrary to the weight of evidence.
Appeal from Suffolk county court.
Action by Edwin Bailey and another against Barbara Gluth. Prom a judgment of the county court affirming a judgment of a justice of the peace, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before Barnard, P. J., and Dykman and Cullen, JJ.
Andrew Heyman, for appellant. Timothy M. Grifflng, for respondents.

Opinion:
Cullen, J.
In the original return of the jus tice the testimony is presented
in a form that makes it difficult to discern what the evidence really was, but enough appears from the original and amended returns to show that a fair question of fact was presented to the justice for decision. As there was evidence to support the judgment, no error of law was committed, and this court has no power on appeal to consider the weight of evidence or disturb the finding of fact. Thurber v. Townsend, 22 N. Y. 517. The judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.