Case Name: SCHEUER v. ROSENBAUM
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1900-07-11
Citations: 65 N.Y.S. 664
Docket Number: 
Parties: SCHEUER v. ROSENBAUM.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 65
Pages: 664–665

Head Matter:
SCHEUER v. ROSENBAUM.
(City Court of New York, General Term.
July 11, 1900)
Verdict—Conflicting Evidence—Review. „ .
Where evidence was conflicting as to whether goods ordered by defendant were delivered in time, and the charge clearly submitted the' whole case to the jury, including the question of delivery, the jury’s affirmative finding was not disturbed on appeal.
Appeal from .special term.
Action by Max Scheuer against Selig Rosenbaum. From a judgment for plaintiff and from an order denying a new trial, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before CORLAN, SCHUCHMAN, and HASCALL, JJ.
Rose & Putzel, for appellant.
Louis Hess, for respondent.

Opinion:
CCXNLAN, J.
The simple question before us on this appeal was whether or not certain goods ordered by the defendant from the plaintiff were delivered or tendered in time. Upon this question the evidence upon the trial was in conflict, and the chprge of the trial justice, to which there wras no exception, clearly stated the whole case to the jury. In addition to this, the defendant at the close of all the testimony asked the court to submit to the jury this precise question of delivery, and the court acquiesced." The jury determined the whole matter in favor of the plaintiff, and we have no inclination to disturb their finding.
Judgment and order appealed from must therefore be affirmed, with costs. All concur.