
    LOVELL et al., Respondents, v. ROEBUCK, Appellant.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    June, 1901.)
    Action by J. Hallett Lovell and others against John Roebuck.
    Edmund F. Driggs, for appellant. Herbert J. Hindes, for respondents.
   PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs’ cause of action was abundantly sustained by the evidence. The defendant repeatedly admitted the correctness of the account, except as to a ibw small items, which appear to have been allowed to him. The counterclaim seems to have been an afterthought, as it was wholly disallowed. It is of no consequence whether the justice was right or wrong in refusing the motion to allow defendant to increase the amount for which he counterclaimed. Judgment affirmed, with costs.  