Frankel Bros. v. Smith

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Frankel Bros. v. Smith

31 Misc. 788, 65 N.Y.S. 201

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 15, 1900

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 31 Misc. 788 (Frankel Bros. v. Smith) 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

Frankel Bros. v. Smith, 31 Misc. 788, 65 N.Y.S. 201 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Ouricm.

The rulings of the trial justice in excluding the evidence of the plaintiff’s witnesses Frankel, because their title to the offices held by them in the plaintiff corporation had not been established to the satisfaction of ..the court, was clearly erroneous. They were acting for the plaintiff corporation, and the competency of their evidence is beyond question. Nor could its force be impaired by disputing the validity of their title to the offices held by them. Indeed, in view of the character of the litigation, it was entirely immaterial whether they were officers of the corporation or not, or if officers, whether they held by proper title. Abb. Tr. Ev. (2d ed.) 50.

Present: Beekman, P. J., Giegerioh and 0’Gorman, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

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

Per Ouricm.

The rulings of the trial justice in excluding the evidence of the plaintiff’s witnesses Frankel, because their title to the offices held by them in the plaintiff corporation had not been established to the satisfaction of ..the court, was clearly erroneous. They were acting for the plaintiff corporation, and the competency of their evidence is beyond question. Nor could its force be impaired by disputing the validity of their title to the offices held by them. Indeed, in view of the character of the litigation, it was entirely immaterial whether they were officers of the corporation or not, or if officers, whether they held by proper title. Abb. Tr. Ev. (2d ed.) 50.

Present: Beekman, P. J., Giegerioh and 0’Gorman, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 Misc. 788, 65 N.Y.S. 201, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frankel-bros-v-smith-nyappterm-1900.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack