
    Charles L. Ortmann v. Robert C. Wilson.
    
      Finding of facts not reviewed, on error. Where the court below has found as a fact that the goods, for which the plaintiff sought to recover, were purchased of plaintiff by defendant, and credit for the same was given exclusively and solely to the defendant, this court, on writ of error, will not review said finding, to determine whether in fact the goods were not purchased by, and credit given to, a third party.
    
      Heard and decided July 10.
    
    Error to Wayne Circuit.
    This was an action of assumpsit brought by Robert 0. Wilson, against Charles L. Ortmann, to recover the purchase price of certain goods sold and delivered. The defense was, that the goods were sold and • delivered to one Kate E. Thornton, and not to the defendant, and that the said Kate E. Thornton, and no other person, became liable therefor; and that said defendant did not undertake, or promise in writing, to pay the plaintiff for said goods. The cause was tried by the court without a jury, and the circuit judge filed a written finding as follows, viz:
    “I find from the evidence as matter of fact that the goods and merchandise mentioned in plaintiff’s bill of particulars were purchased of plaintiff by the defendant, and credit for the same, so far as credit was given, was given exclusively and solely to said defendant.
    “ From the foregoing facts I find as conclusion of law that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the sum of $422 63. Judgment for plaintiff for that amount, and costs to be taxed.”
    It was assigned as error, that “the court found from the evidence in the said case in the court below, that the goods mentioned in said plaintiff’s bill of particulars therein were purchased of said Robert C. Wilson, by said Charles L. Ortmann, and credit for the same was given, so far as rcedit was given, exclusively and solely to said Ortmann.”
    
      
      L. T. Durand, for plaintiff in error.
    
      G. J. Reilly and Moore. & Griffin, for defendant in error, were stopped by tbe court.
   Per Curiam. ,

Tbe circuit judge bas found tbe facts, and from tbe finding we bave no doubt that tbe judgment was correct. He finds as matter of fact, tbat tbe credit was given to tbe defendant. This finding we cannot review. The judgment must therefore be affirmed with costs.  