Mattera v. Knickerbocker Ice Co.
This text of 242 A.D. 694 (Mattera v. Knickerbocker Ice 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.
Opinion
Judgment affirmed, without costs. We are of the opinion that the defendant should have had its witness in court at the time the case was called for trial; furthermore, the witness not being in court, it was the duty of the defendant’s attorney to'have called the court’s attention to the absence of this witness at the time the case was called for trial. In addition to this, the moving papers fail to show what the missing witness would have testified to if present. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Carswell, J., dissents and votes for reversal and a new trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
242 A.D. 694, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mattera-v-knickerbocker-ice-co-nyappdiv-1934.