
    REGAN, Respondent, v. EHRICH et al., Appellants.
    (City Court of New York, General Term.
    October 30, 1896.)
    Action by Cornelius F. Began against Samuel W. Ehrich and another.
    F. O. Eustic, for appellants.
    A. P. Wagener, for respondent.
   PEB CUBIAM.

Upon this appeal appellants urge a reversal for the reason, as they argue, that the evidence shows contributory negligence by plaintiff. We have carefully examined the record, and cannot agree with appellants’ contention. There is nothing in the appeal record which would justify us in declaring the finding of the jury that plaintiff was not guilty of negligence was wrong. We always favor upholding the finding of a jury upon a question of fact unless it is clearly and indisputably apparent that the jury were influenced by sympathy, prejudice, passion, or disregard of evidence,—something which, in our judgment, did not happen herein. Judgment must be affirmed, with costs.  