delivered 'the opinion of the Court.

The decision of this cause rests upon the proper determination of a question of fact, viz., whether the appellee was in the exercise of ordinary care at the time he was struck and injured by a car run "by appellant.

We see no sufficient reason for interfering with the conclusion of the jury in this regard, sanctioned, as it has been, by the action of the court below.

The judgment of the Superior Court is therefore affirmed.