Moritz v. Rachow

Whatever defect of proof there might have been at the time the plaintily rested as to the delivery of the goods in question, such defect was subsequently cured by the admission of the defendant Viehman, when he was called as a witness fór the defense. All questions of fact were resolved on conflicting *1135Evidence In favor of the plaintiff by the trial justice, and we see no reason for reversing his decision. Judgment affirmed, with costs.