
    RIHANI, Appellant, v. NAMHOAL, Respondent.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    June 28, 1899.)
    Action by Ameen F. Rihani against Sadie Namhoal. There was a judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Adolphus D. Pape, for appellant. Edward A. Sumner, for respondent.
   LEVENTRITT, J.

This appeal involves only a question of fact. The plaintiff sued on a written agreement, alleged to have been executed by the defendant by affixing her mark thereto, by which she undertook to pay to the plaintiff 83% per cent, of an eventual recovery in an action for personal injuries against the Consolidated Traction Company of New Jersey. The answer denied that any agreement was made, or that any services were rendered thereunder, and set up as affirmative defense that the signature thereto was forged. On sharply conflicting evidence the justice decided in favor of the defendant. His determination is supported by ample evidence, and, as the exceptions are uniformly frivolous, the judgment will be affirmed. Judgment affirmed, with costs to the respondent. All concur.  