
    Max Lansburgh, Resp’t, v. Thomas Walsh et al., App’lts.
    
      (New York City Court, General Term,
    
    
      Filed May 18, 1894.)
    
    Appeal — Afpibmancb.
    Where the second trial was conducted on the lines laid down in the opinion filed on the former appeal, the verdict is satisfactorily sustained by the evidence and no error appears in the rulings, the jadgment will be affirmed.
    Appeal from judgment entered on verdict of a jury in favor of plaintiff.
    • M. J. Scanlon, for app’lts; L. G. Rosenblatt, for resp’t.
   Ehrlich, C. J.

The facts, as they appear in the appeal book, are substantially the same as on the former appeal, Lansburgh v. Walsh, 48 St. Rep. 639, 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 non-suit 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 (48 St. Rep., supra) 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.

Van Wyck, J. concurs.  