Hopper v. Comfort Coal-Lumber Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hopper v. Comfort Coal-Lumber Co.

276 A.D.2d 1014

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 6, 1950·Published

Opinion

Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur; Carswell, Acting P. J., and MacCrate, J., dissent and vote to affirm, with the following memorandum: Although the witness Hansen previously had testified that he was a paid investigator who had acted in the interest of and on behalf of defendant, it was permissible, as further inquiry with respect to his interest or bias reflecting on credibility, for plaintiffs’ counsel to elicit the fact that he was employed by a named insurance company which was insurer of defendant. (Wood v. New York State Elec. & Gas Corp., 257 App. Div. 172, affd. 281 N. Y. 797; Young v. Sonking, 275 App. Div. 871.) [See post, p. 1082.]

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

Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur; Carswell, Acting P. J., and MacCrate, J., dissent and vote to affirm, with the following memorandum: Although the witness Hansen previously had testified that he was a paid investigator who had acted in the interest of and on behalf of defendant, it was permissible, as further inquiry with respect to his interest or bias reflecting on credibility, for plaintiffs’ counsel to elicit the fact that he was employed by a named insurance company which was insurer of defendant. (Wood v. New York State Elec. & Gas Corp., 257 App. Div. 172, affd. 281 N. Y. 797; Young v. Sonking, 275 App. Div. 871.) [See post, p. 1082.]

Hopper v. Comfort Coal-Lumber Co., 276 A.D.2d 1014 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1950).

Pincite

276 A.D.2d 1014 (Hopper v. Comfort Coal-Lumber Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related