Case Name: James E. Nichols et al., Appellants, v. Philip Nehrbas, Respondent
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1897-10
Citations: 21 Misc. 785
Docket Number: 
Parties: James E. Nichols et al., Appellants, v. Philip Nehrbas, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 21
Pages: 785–786

Head Matter:
CITY COURT OF NEW YORK — GENERAL TERM,
OCTOBER, 1897.
James E. Nichols et al., Appellants, v. Philip Nehrbas, Respondent.
Appeal from a judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon a verdict, and'from order denying motion for a new trial.
Hotchkiss & Maddox, for appellants.
A. H. Berrick, for respondent.

Opinion:
Conlan, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment entered on the verdict of a jury, and from ah order denying a motion for a new trial.
The action was brought to recover for goods sold and delivered by the plaintiffs to the defendant, and the answer is a general denial. .
The only dispute in the case, was as to whether the sale was to the defendant or to the defendant's son, Philip Nehrbas, Jr.
The issue of fact thus raised was the sole question litigated by the trial, and the evidence of the plaintiffs' witnesses and the witnesses for the defendant is in- direct conflict as to the order of the goods.
No errors appear in the case as to the admission or exclusion of evidence. -
The appellants criticise a portion of the charge of the court to the jury, and urges the same as a ground for reversal, but we think . the charge, as k whole, was fair to the plaintiff, 'and that the verdict should stand, and, therefore,' the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Fitzsimons and Schuchman, JJ., concur.
Judgment affirmed with costs.