Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Epstein v. Board of Regents

Epstein v. Board of Regents

268 A.D. 739, 53 N.Y.S.2d 847, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5298
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 7, 1945
StatusPublished

This text of 268 A.D. 739 (Epstein v. Board of Regents) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Epstein v. Board of Regents, 268 A.D. 739, 53 N.Y.S.2d 847, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5298 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1945).

Opinions

Hill, P. J.

The determination should be annulled and the matter remitted. Evidence given by detectives and those who, for hire, seek to entrap suspected persons, should be examined with care and weighed with prudence. (Yates v. Yates, 211 N. Y. 163; Winston v. Winston, 165 N. Y. 553.) Courts have placed a low estimate on the evidence given by paid detectives (Moller v. Moller, 115 N. Y. 466), but this is a guide for the judicial conscience rather than a rule of law. (Yates v. Yates, supra,) Cross-examination is a vital feature of our law, and the testimony of witnesses should be probed and subjected to that test. (People v. Becker, 210 N. Y. 274.) When this case was here before (267 App. Div. 27) we said: “ The cross-examination of the witness Middleton was unduly restricted ”. However, the petitioner has again been denied the right to cross-examine.

The determination should be annulled and the matter remitted.

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

Related

Winston v. . Winston
59 N.E. 273 (New York Court of Appeals, 1901)
Bannon v. Bannon
1 N.E.2d 975 (New York Court of Appeals, 1936)
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. 9 Avenue-31 Street Corp.
9 N.E.2d 20 (New York Court of Appeals, 1937)
Matter of Weinstein v. Board of Regents
56 N.E.2d 104 (New York Court of Appeals, 1944)
People v. . Becker
104 N.E. 896 (New York Court of Appeals, 1914)
Yates v. . Yates
105 N.E. 195 (New York Court of Appeals, 1914)
Moller v. . Moller
22 N.E. 169 (New York Court of Appeals, 1889)
Cullinan v. Trolley Club
65 A.D. 202 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1901)
Farley v. Bronx Bath & Hotel Co.
163 A.D. 459 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1914)
American Equitable Corp. v. Parkhill
252 A.D. 260 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1937)
Weinstein v. Board of Regents of University of New York
267 A.D. 4 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1943)
Rothenberg v. Board of Regents of University of New York
267 A.D. 24 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1943)
Epstein v. Board of Regents of University of New York
267 A.D. 27 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1943)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
268 A.D. 739, 53 N.Y.S.2d 847, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5298, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/epstein-v-board-of-regents-nyappdiv-1945.