
USCA1 Opinion

	




          February 9, 1993      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                                                                     _________________________          No. 92-1847                             FRANCO ACEVEDO DIAZ, ET AL.,                                Plaintiffs, Appellees,                                          v.                         JOSE E. APONTE DE LA TORRE, ET AL.,                                Defendants, Appellees.                                                                                     _________________________                               DIANETTE MATOS, ET AL.,                               Plaintiffs, Appellants.                                                                                     _________________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO                      [Hon. Justo Arenas, U.S. Magistrate Judge]                                          _____________________                                                                                     _________________________                                        Before                        Selya, Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges.                                              ______________                                                                                     _________________________               Raul Barrera Morales for appellants.               ____________________               William Reyes Elias, with whom  Cesar R. Miranda Law  Office               ___________________             ____________________________          was on brief, for defendants-appellees.                              _________________________                              _________________________                         Per  Curiam.   The  appellants herein,  plaintiffs                         Per  Curiam.                         ___________          below,  appeal from adverse jury verdicts.  We have canvassed the          record, studied the briefs, and entertained oral argument.                      The  evidence was clearly  conflicting.  And, moreover,          the  plaintiffs neither  challenged  the magistrate  judge's jury          instructions  nor moved for a  new trial after  the verdicts were          rendered.   Under the circumstances, we  need go no further:   we          decline  to   disturb  the   jury's  evaluative   judgments,  its          resolution  of evidentiary  conflicts, or  its choice  among what          were, at the very least, plausible, albeit competing, inferences.          See  La Amiga del Pueblo, Inc. v.  Robles, 937 F.2d 689, 691 (1st          ___  _________________________     ______          Cir. 1991).                    This appeal, in its present posture, presents no fairly          debatable  question  for  appellate   review.    We,   therefore,          summarily affirm.1  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.                               ___          Affirmed.          Affirmed.          ________                                        ____________________               1The   companion  appeals,   Nos.   92-1846   and   92-1848,          consolidated for  oral argument  before us,  will be  resolved by          separate opinion.
