Hauptman v. New York Edison Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hauptman v. New York Edison Co.

160 A.D. 917, 145 N.Y.S. 696

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 15, 1914·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The action of the court in restricting the number of witnesses whom the defendant should call to disprove the plaintiff’s cause of action was without justification. The defendant had a right to call as many persons who were witnesses to the accident as could testify to the main issue involved which was to be submitted to the jury. The judgment and order are, therefore, reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ. Judgment and order reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event. Order to be settled on notice.

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

Per Curiam:

The action of the court in restricting the number of witnesses whom the defendant should call to disprove the plaintiff’s cause of action was without justification. The defendant had a right to call as many persons who were witnesses to the accident as could testify to the main issue involved which was to be submitted to the jury. The judgment and order are, therefore, reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ. Judgment and order reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event. Order to be settled on notice.

Hauptman v. New York Edison Co., 160 A.D. 917, 145 N.Y.S. 696 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

160 A.D. 917 (Hauptman v. New York Edison Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related