Per Curiam.
The plaintiffs recovered judgments against the defendant.
Our examination of the testimony in this case leads us to the conclusion that there were disputed questions of fact which were properly submitted to the jury by the trial judge, and that hence there was no error in refusing to nonsuit the plaintiffs nor in refusing to direct a verdict for the defendant. Rush v. Commercial Realty Co., 7 N. J. Mis. R. 337. The judgment will be affirmed.