
    LANSBURGH, Respondent, v. WALSH et al., Appellants.
    (City Court of New York, General Term.
    May 18, 1894.)
    Action by Max Lansburgh against Thomas Walsh and another.
    Argued before EHRLICH, C. J., and VAN WYCK, J.
    M. J. Scanlon, for appellants.
    L. G. Rosenblatt, for respondent.
   EHRLICH, G. J.

The facts as they appear in the appeal book are substantially the same as on the former appeal (20 N. Y. Supp. 401), and for the reasons stated in the opinion of Van Wyck, J., the case was one for determination by a jury; and, for not sending it to the jury, the nonsuit ordered on the first trial was set aside. The second trial (that which we are now reviewing) seems to have been conducted on the lines laid down in the ■opinion filed on the former appeal (20 N. Y. Supp. 401); and the finding of the jury in favor of the plaintiff being satisfactorily sustained by the evidence, and no error appearing in the rulings which require correction by a new trial, it follows that the judgment appealed from must be affirmed, with •costs.  