Berrent v. Simpson

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Berrent v. Simpson

109 N.Y.S. 753

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedApril 10, 1908

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 109 N.Y.S. 753 (Berrent v. Simpson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Berrent v. Simpson, 109 N.Y.S. 753 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff sues the defendant to replevin a pin of the value of $800. The judgment was rendered upon the verdict of a jury in favor of the plaintiff.

The defendant is a licensed pawnbroker and received the pin from one Sherer. Upon the trial, the record of conviction of Sherer was admitted in evidence over the objection and exception of the defendant. We think that its admission was error, which calls for the reversal of this judgment. The record of conviction in the action of People v. Sherer was not competent evidence against the defendant. If Sherer had been acquitted upon the criminal charge, we think no one would: suggest that the record of that acquittal would be competent evidence against the plaintiff. Yet it is a poor rule that will not work both ways. If the record was competent for- one purpose, it would be competent for the other. ,

The. judgment is reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff sues the defendant to replevin a pin of the value of $800. The judgment was rendered upon the verdict of a jury in favor of the plaintiff.

The defendant is a licensed pawnbroker and received the pin from one Sherer. Upon the trial, the record of conviction of Sherer was admitted in evidence over the objection and exception of the defendant. We think that its admission was error, which calls for the reversal of this judgment. The record of conviction in the action of People v. Sherer was not competent evidence against the defendant. If Sherer had been acquitted upon the criminal charge, we think no one would: suggest that the record of that acquittal would be competent evidence against the plaintiff. Yet it is a poor rule that will not work both ways. If the record was competent for- one purpose, it would be competent for the other. ,

The. judgment is reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 N.Y.S. 753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/berrent-v-simpson-nyappterm-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack