Linick v. International Ry. Co.

90 N.Y.S. 1104

This text of 90 N.Y.S. 1104 (Linick v. International Ry. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Linick v. International Ry. Co., 90 N.Y.S. 1104 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1904).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Judgment and order reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide event. Held, that it was error to exclude the evidence offered by the defendant for the purpose of proving, in effect, that plaintiff’s husband and witness attempted to induce the witness McNamara to promote and aid plaintiff’s claim. Schultz v. Third Ave. R. Co., 89 N. Y. 242: Nowack v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co., 166 N. Y. 433, 60 N. E. 32, 54 L. R. A. 592, 82 Am. St. Rep. 691; Gumby v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co., 65 App. Div. 38, 72 N. Y. Supp. 551; Lamb v. Lamb, 146 N. Y. 317, 41 N. E. 26.

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

Related

Schultz v. . Third Avenue Railroad Company
89 N.Y. 242 (New York Court of Appeals, 1882)
Lamb v. . Lamb
41 N.E. 26 (New York Court of Appeals, 1895)
Nowack v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
60 N.E. 32 (New York Court of Appeals, 1901)
Gumby v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
65 A.D. 38 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1901)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
90 N.Y.S. 1104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/linick-v-international-ry-co-nyappdiv-1904.