
    Boyd et al. v. Fumonte.
    Appeal from the judgment of a District Oourt in the city of New York.
    
      John, F. Foley, for plaintiffs (respondents).
    
      Harris Wilson, for defendant (appellant).
   Bisohoff, J.

The action was brought to recover for wines sold and delivered by plaintiffs to defendant. Upon the trial, plaintiffs’ salesman testified that he was ignorant of any copartnership existing between defendant and Coari, and that the wines were sold to defendant upon the latter’s credit. Defendant testified that he and Coari were partners, and that plaintiffs’ salesman was so .informed at the time of the sale. ¡Next, plaintiffs introduced evidence to show that Coari’s check was accepted in payment conditionally only, to wit, that it was to be credited in payment if paid on presentation. This, also, defendant attempted to refute. It was conceded that the check was not paid.

Upon the conflict of evidence, the court below decided in favor of plaintiffs for the agreed purchase price, as it was quite competent for it to do.

Defendant has, therefore, not sustained the burden of showing error, and the judgment appealed from must be affirmed, with costs.

Gtegerich, J., concurs.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.  