
    PATTERSON v. CITY TRUST, SAFE-DEPOSIT & SURETY CO. OF PHILADELPHIA.
    (City Court of New York,
    General Term.
    May 22, 1899.)
    Appeal and Error—Conclusiveness op Verdict.
    If the evidence was sufficient to warrant a submission of the cause to the jury, its verdict will not be disturbed on appeal if it does not appear that the jury were influenced by passion, prejudice, or malice.
    Appeal from trial term.
    Action by Stephen G-. Patterson against the City Trust, Safe-Deposit & Surety Company of Philadelphia. There was judgment for defendant, from which plaintiff appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before McCÁRTHY and SCHUCHMAN, JJ.
    Campbell & Hance, for appellant.
    Dayton & Swift, for respondent.
   MCCARTHY, j.

This was clearly a case to submit to the jury, and upon which they alone, from the evidence presented, could determine. We are satisfied that the whole was fairly submitted, and that the jury properly found for the defendant. Unless it appears that the jury, in arriving at their determination, did so under prejudice, passion, or malice, their verdict will not be disturbed, and particularly so where the case points that it is one clearly for their determination. This case was one, and we find no error, and therefore affirm the judgment, with costs.

SCHUCHMAN, J., concurs.  