
    RAMSDILL v. SWANICK.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.
    November 21, 1899.)
    Appeal—Record—New Trial.
    Where the record does not show entry of an order refusing new trial,, nor that the case contains all the evidence given on the trial, the appellate court cannot consider questions of fact.
    Appeal from trial term.
    Action by John N. Ramsdill against James F. Swanick. There' was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before PARKER, P. J., and LANDON, HERRICK, MERWIN, and PUTNAM, JJ.
    James F. Swanick, in pro. per.
    Edgar T. Brackett, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

An examination of the record in this case does not disclose any exception or error of law for which the judgment should be reversed. As to questions of fact, and as to whether the verdict is excessive, we are precluded from examining them, for the reason that the record does not show that any order denying a motion for a new trial was ever entered, nor that the case contains all the evidence that was given upon the trial.

The judgment therefore must be affirmed, with costs.

PUTNAM, J., not acting.  