
    Engelhard v. Nordman, Appellant.
    
      Practice, O. P. — Judgments non obstante veredicto — Act of April 22, 1905, P. L. 286 — Point for binding instructions — Appeals— Quashing appeals.
    
    An appeal from refusal of defendant’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto will be dismissed, where the record shows that the motion was not based upon a written point, presented at the time of trial, requesting binding instructions.
    Argued April 28, 1924.
    Appeal, No. 31, April T., 1924, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Allegheny Co., Oct. T., 1920, No. 2359, on verdict for plaintiff in the case of E. F. Engelhard v. J. J. Nordman.
    Before Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn and Gawthrop, JJ.
    Appeal dismissed.
    Assumpsit on contract of purchase and sale. Before Carpenter, J.
    Verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $594.50, and judgment thereon. Defendant appealed.
    
      Error assigned was refusal of defendant’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto.
    
      Arthur O. Fording, for appellant.
    
      John E. Winner, and with him Frank I. Gollmar, for appellee.
    May 5, 1924:
   Per Curiam,

As the motion for judgment n. o. v. was not supported by a written point for binding instructions as required by the statute, it was properly refused. The appeal is dismissed: Standard Brewing Co. v. Knapp, 79 Pa. Superior Ct. 252.  