Mazzoli v. Ziegfeld

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Mazzoli v. Ziegfeld

130 N.Y.S. 1120

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 29, 1911

StatusPublished

This text of 130 N.Y.S. 1120 (Mazzoli v. Ziegfeld) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mazzoli v. Ziegfeld, 130 N.Y.S. 1120 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

BIJUR, J.

This action was brought to recover a sum of money alleged to have been advanced by the plaintiff to the defendant at Monte Carlo. Plaintiff’s story of the loan was amply corroborated by a disinterested witness. A letter and telegram of the defendant were also introduced, which strongly corroborate plaintiff’s version of the transaction. Defendant’s explanation of these two papers is unsatisfactory and unconvincing, and his version of the transaction between the plaintiff and himself is highly improbable and at variance with the language of his two communications. Under these circumstances, it is plain on a careful examination of the record that the plaintiff amply sustained the burden of evidence resting upon him, and that the judgment below is against the weight of evidence. Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

BIJUR, J.

This action was brought to recover a sum of money alleged to have been advanced by the plaintiff to the defendant at Monte Carlo. Plaintiff’s story of the loan was amply corroborated by a disinterested witness. A letter and telegram of the defendant were also introduced, which strongly corroborate plaintiff’s version of the transaction. Defendant’s explanation of these two papers is unsatisfactory and unconvincing, and his version of the transaction between the plaintiff and himself is highly improbable and at variance with the language of his two communications. Under these circumstances, it is plain on a careful examination of the record that the plaintiff amply sustained the burden of evidence resting upon him, and that the judgment below is against the weight of evidence. Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

130 N.Y.S. 1120, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mazzoli-v-ziegfeld-nyappterm-1911.