Case Name: William A. Farrell, Respondent, v. Anna C. Haeger, Appellant; Sigmund Fliegman, Respondent, v. Samuel Mendel, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Common Pleas
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1895-12
Citations: 15 Misc. 687
Docket Number: 
Parties: William A. Farrell, Respondent, v. Anna C. Haeger, Appellant. Sigmund Fliegman, Respondent, v. Samuel Mendel, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 15
Pages: 687–687

Head Matter:
William A. Farrell, Respondent, v. Anna C. Haeger, Appellant. Sigmund Fliegman, Respondent, v. Samuel Mendel, Appellant.
Appeals from judgments of District Court.
Jacob Fromme, for appellant Haeger.
James C. de la Mare, for respondent Farrell.
Mashbir & Cukor, for appellant Mendel.
Morris H. Gottlieb, for respondent Fliegman.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The appeals .in these cases bring up for review questions of fact only. The judgment in both cases seems to be supported by evidence, and although the evidence was contradicted by the respective defendants, it was pecul-* iarly the province of the court, having the witnesses before it, to determine the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given to them testimony. The judgment in each case should be affirmed, with costs to.respondent.
Present: Bookstaveb and Bischofe, JJ.
Judgments affirmed, with costs.