Meyer v. Riordan ( 1900 )

PER CURIAM.

If the appellant was dissatisfied with the statement made by the trial justice to the jury, he should have requested him to charge that there was no evidence pro or con upon the facts concerning which the jury wished to be instructed. Appellant’s mere exception to the instruction given we think was not sufficient. Quill v. Railroad Co. (Com. P1.) 11 N. Y. Supp. 80; Mallory v. Railroad Co., 3 Abb. Dec. 139.

Judgment is affirmed, with costs.