
    DAVID ACKART, Respondent, v. GILBERT V. LANSING and another, Appellants.
    
      Charge — error i/n — when judgment reversed for.
    
    While the court may reverse a judgment lor an error in the charge to the jury, in the absence of an exception, it will only do so when it is evident that the court misunderstood the law, and, as a consequence, misdirected and misled the jury in the general effect of the charge.
    Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff entered upon the verdict of a jury, and from an order denying- a motion for a new trial made on the ground of surprise and of newly discovered evidence.
    The judgment entered upon a former trial of this action was reversed by the Court of Appeals (59 N. Y., 646; 48 How., 374), on the ground that, under the evidence, the negligence of the defendants was a question of fact for the jury.
    ■ The General Term, upon this appeal, held, that the evidence given upon the trial did not differ essentially from that given upon the first trial, and felt bound to follow the decision of the Court of Appeals, and to treat the verdict of the jury as conclusive.
    
      
      E. F. Bulla/rd, for the appellants. B. A. Barmenter, for the respondent.
   Opinion

per Guriam.

Present — Learned, P. J., Bocees and Boardman, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.  