Opinion
June, 1901.
Edmund F. Driggs, for appellant.
Herbert J. Hindes, for respondents.
The plaintiffs' cause of action was abundantly sustained by the evidence. The defendant repeatedly admitted the correctness of the account except as to a few 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.
Present: SCOTT, P.J., BEACH and FITZGERALD, JJ.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.