
    STRIKER v. BERNSTEIN.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.
    February 13, 1914.)
    1. Courts (§ 190*)—Municipal Court—Briefs—Record. On appeal from the Municipal Court of the city of New York, respondent’s counsel is not authorized to attach to his brief an affidavit containing facts in support of the judgment.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Courts, Dec. Dig. § 190;* Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. § 103.]
    2. Appeal and Error (§ 1010*)—Review—Judgment. A judgment for plaintiff, in an action tried to the court, will be affirmed on appeal, where the testimony of plaintiff’s witnesses, if accepted as true, supports the judgment.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 3979-3982, 4024; Dec. Dig. § 1010.*]
    Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Third District.
    Action by George W. Striker as executor against Mitchell Bernstein. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
    Argued January term, 1914, before LEHMAN, PAGE, and BI-JUR, JJ.
    Samuel Brand, of New York City, for appellant.
    J. E. Davidson, of New York City, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The respondent’s counsel has attached to his brief an affidavit to which he refers as containing facts in support of the judgment. This practice is entirely unauthorized. The affidavit has not been read by the court, and will be returned to the counsel by the clerk.

The appellant contends that the judgment was contrary to the weight of the evidence. Accepting the testimony of the plaintiff’s witnesses as true, the judgment is supported by the evidence, and should be affirmed, with costs.  