
    46579.
    PEEPLES v. HOLLAND et al.
   Bell, Chief Judge.

The jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff in a tort action against two alleged partners. The only issue on appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s verdict that there was in fact a partnership. The appellant, one of the defendants, contends that the evidence will not sanction a finding that he was engaged in a partnership with his co-defendant at the time of the incident which gave rise to this litigation. Irrespective of whether the evidence supports a finding that appellant was an actual partner in the business, the evidence amply justified a finding that he was an ostensible partner under Code § 75-104. There was no error in the judgment overruling the motion for judgment n.o.v. and the motion for new trial.

Submitted September 9, 1971

Decided January 4, 1972

Rehearing denied January 25, 1972.

Whitehurst & Cohen, A. J. Whitehurst, for appellant.

Altman, Herndon & Fowler, Larkin M. Fowler, Jr., for appellees.

Judgment affirmed.

Pannell and Deen, JJ., concur.  