Case Name: James H. Lane, et al., Appellants v. Charles Rosenberg, et al., Respondents
Court: New York Superior Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1888-06-20
Citations: 24 Jones & S. 604
Docket Number: 
Parties: James H. Lane, et al., Appellants v. Charles Rosenberg, et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Superior Court of the city of New York
Volume: 56
Pages: 604–604

Head Matter:
James H. Lane, et al., Appellants v. Charles Rosenberg, et al., Respondents.
Decided June 20, 1888.
Appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment entered on a verdict directed by the trial judge in favor of defendants.
M. W. Divine, for appellants. Richard S. Newcomb, for respondents.
Sedgwick Ch. J., and Freedman, J.

Opinion:
This appeal involved the question as to whether the evidence was such that a- verdict in favor of' plaintiffs would have been allowed to stand. The Court held (Freedman, J., writing, Sedgwick, Ch. J., concurring) that " upon the whole case the «evidence preponderated so much in favor of the defendants, that, if the case had been submitted to the jury and their verdict had been in favor of the plaintiffs, such verdict would not be permitted to stand. Under these circumstances the trial judge was justified in directing a verdict for the defendants, especially as the plaintiffs made no request to be allowed to go to the jury, and affirmed the judgment."