Seddon v. Donald — 58 N.Y. Super. Ct. 518

Majority

p. 518

CHARLES A. SEDDON et al., Appellants v. ROBERT DONALD, Respondent.

Headnote

Questions of fact, what acts are necessary on the trial to ensure their review.

Where the plaintiffs, at the close of the case, made no motion for the direction of a verdict in their favor, and issues were submitted to the jury under a charge to which no exception was. taken, and after the jury had found a verdict for defendant the plaintiffs’ counsel moved generally for a new trial but stated no ground for the motion, and the case contains no certificate that it contains all the evidence, no questions of fact can be reviewed on the appeal under these circumstances.

Before Sedgwick, Ch. J., and Fbeedman, J.

Decided January 5, 1891.

Appeal from judgment entered in favor of the de

p. 519

fendant upon the verdict of a jury, and from order denying plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial.

Stallknecht & Randel, attorneys, and William F. Randel of counsel, for appellants.

Wilder, Wilder & Lynch, attorneys, and William J. Lynch and James M. Hunt of counsel, for respondent.

The plaintiffs, at the close of the case, made no motion for the direction of a verdict in their favor. The issues were submitted to the jury under a charge to which no exception was. taken. The jury having found for the defendant, the plaintiffs moved generally for a new trial, but stated no ground for their motion. Moreover, there is no certificate that the case contains all the evidence. Under these circumstances no question of fact can be reviewed.

The exceptions to the admission and exclusion of evidence have been examined, but none of them constitutes sufficient ground for reversal.

The judgment and order should be affirmed, with costs.

Sedgwick, Ch. J., concurred.