
    RUTHERFORD HOSPITAL v. THE FLORENCE MILLS.
    (Filed 21 May, 1924.)
    Appeal by defendant from Ray, J., at August Term, 1923, of RUTHERFORD.
    Civil action, to recover for medical, surgical and professional services rendered one of defendant’s employees at tbe instance of defendant’s superintendent.
    From a verdict and judgment in favor of plaintiff tbe defendant appeals.
    
      Solomon Gallert for plaintiff.
    
    
      Quinn, Hamrick & Harris for defendant.
    
   Per Curiam.

Defendant relies chiefly upon its demurrer to tbe evidence and motion for judgment as of nonsuit. Viewing tbe testimony in tbe most favorable light for tbe plaintiff, tbe accepted position on a motion of this kind, we think tbe trial court was justified in submitting tbe case to tbe jury, and that tbe verdict is warranted by tbe evidence. A careful perusal of tbe entire record leaves us with tbe impression that tbe cause has been tried substantially in agreement with tbe law bearing on tbe subject, and that tbe verdict and judgment should be upheld. Miller v. Cornell, ante, 550.

No error.  