Fulton Packing Co. v. Beekman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fulton Packing Co. v. Beekman

274 A.D. 894, 82 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3934

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 11, 1948·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover for goods sold and delivered, judgment in favor of respondents and against appellant, entered upon the verdict of a jury, reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. In our opinion the trial court erred in excluding, on respondent Beekman’s objection, portions of an affidavit made by that respondent. The excluded evidence should have been submitted to the jury as an admission by such respondent, inconsistent with respondents’ claims on trial, and its exclusion was prejudicial to appellant’s substantial rights. Johnston, Acting P. J., Adel, Nolan, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover for goods sold and delivered, judgment in favor of respondents and against appellant, entered upon the verdict of a jury, reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. In our opinion the trial court erred in excluding, on respondent Beekman’s objection, portions of an affidavit made by that respondent. The excluded evidence should have been submitted to the jury as an admission by such respondent, inconsistent with respondents’ claims on trial, and its exclusion was prejudicial to appellant’s substantial rights. Johnston, Acting P. J., Adel, Nolan, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur.

Fulton Packing Co. v. Beekman, 274 A.D. 894, 82 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3934 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1948).

Pincite

274 A.D. 894 (Fulton Packing Co. v. Beekman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related