
    Seddon et al. v. Donald.
    
      (Superior Court of New York City, General Term.
    
    January 5,1891.)
    Appeal—Review op Evidence.
    At the close of a trial plaintiffs made no motion for the direction of a verdict in their favor, and took no exception to the charge; and, on the jury finding for defendant, they moved generally for a new trial, stating no ground therefor. The case on appeal did not show that it contained all the evidence. Held, that no question of fact could be reviewed.
    Appeal from trial term.
    Action by Charles A. Seddon and Adolph B. Rice against Robert Donald. Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment for defendant, entered on the verdict of a jury, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial.
    Argued before Sedgwick, C. J., and Fbeedman, J.
    
      Stallknecht & Randel, ( William F. Handel, of counsel,) for appellants. Wilder, Wilder & Lynch, (James M. Hunt and William J. Lynch, of counsel,) for respondent.
   Freedman, J.

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.  