
    Snyder v. O’Connor.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, Third Department.
    
    November 20,1888.)
    Appeal—Review—Sufficiency of Evidence.
    Where the testimony before a referee is conflicting, and, assuming that that of defendant is worthy of credit, the clear weight of the testimony is in his favor, a judgment for defendant will not be disturbed.
    Appeal from judgment on report of referee..
    Action by Jacob H. Snyder against Thomas O’Connor, to recover for money loaned. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
    Argued before Learned, P. J., and Landon and Ingalls, JJ.
    
      Lansing & Chapman, {Henry A. King, of counsel,) for appellant. Byron E. Center, {Orin Cambell, of counsel,) for respondent.
   Landon, J.

The plaintiff sought to recover for money loaned to the defendant at various times. The referee found that the plaintiff had loaned the defendant less than he alleged, and that the defendant had paid him more than he admitted, and enough to satisfy in full all plaintiff’s demands against him, and that the parties had fully settled and adjusted their respective accounts. These findings are made upon conflicting testimony. No error of law is alleged, and we are asked to reverse upon the facts. We have carefully read all the testimony, and find that the referee’s conclusions of fact are supported by sufficient testimony to sustain them. If the testimony on the part of the defendant is worthy of credit, and the referee assumes that it is, the clear weight of all the testimony is in his favor. No case is made that would justify a reversal. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Learned, P. J., and Ingalls, J„ concur.  