Ginsburgh v. Solomon
This text of 123 N.Y.S. 246 (Ginsburgh v. Solomon) 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.
Opinion
The defense was infancy. Defendant’s father and brother testified that the defendant was not 20 years of age at the time of the trial. His brother testified to the same effect; both giving dates and details of defendant’s birth. Defendant was asked how old he was. The question was objected to, and excluded, and an exception [247]*247taken by defendant’s counsel. This constitutes reversible error. Koester v. Rochester Candy Works, 194 N. Y. 92, 96, 87 N. E. 77, 19 L. R. A. (N. S.) 783.
Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
123 N.Y.S. 246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ginsburgh-v-solomon-nyappterm-1910.