Krauss v. Abeles

City of New York Municipal Court

Krauss v. Abeles

20 Misc. 697, 46 N.Y.S. 531

DecidedJuly 15, 1897

StatusPublished

This text of 20 Misc. 697 (Krauss v. Abeles) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Krauss v. Abeles, 20 Misc. 697, 46 N.Y.S. 531 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1897).

Pincite

Opinion

McCarthy, J.

This is entirely a question of fact and was fairly and properly left to the jury.

They have believed the plaintiffs’ testimony and found for them.

It is not the rule and there is no such law that where a dispute arises and only the plaintiff and the defendant were present, the plaintiff cannot recover, because he is interested.

It is still a question for the jury under proper instructions which the appellant availed himself fully of.

Judgment is, therefore, affirmed, with costs.

Van Wyck, Ch. J., and Sohuchman, J., concur.

Judgment affirmed, -with costs.

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