
    TUCKER et al. v. McLEAN et al.
    (Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.
    December 12, 1892.)
    Review on Appeal. ' ' A judgment based on conflicting evidence will not be reversed where only-questions of fact are involved.
    Appeal from circuit court, Kings county.
    Action by Harrison A. Tucker and John Wood against Alexander' McLean, Frederick Howard, and Susan B. McLean. Defendants obtained judgment. Plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed. .
    Argued before DYKMAN and PRATT, JJ.
    Charles M. Stafford, for appellants.
    James & Thomas H. Troy, for respondents.
   PRATT, J.

An examination of the case discloses no errors of law. The questions to be considered are of fact. The conflict of testimony is great, but we finally conclude that the rules that control onr action do -not permit us to interfere with the judgment. When the trial judge, •who has seen and heard the witnesses, has determined the facts, the case must be substantially free from doubt to justify a reviewing court in disturbing the decision. We are not able to say that this case is •such, and the judgment must be affirmed, with costs. "  