McDermott v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

McDermott v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad

94 N.Y.S. 516

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 22, 1905

StatusPublished

This text of 94 N.Y.S. 516 (McDermott v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad) 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

McDermott v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad, 94 N.Y.S. 516 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1905).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

The witness Bouleé volunteered the statement, “I really think the man has tuberculosis now from the effects of that,” referring to the experience which the witness Boulee concluded that the plaintiff had undergone. The defendant excepted to the denial of his motion to strike out this statement. , This exception presents error, as the record does not disclose what the word “that” covered.

The judgment will therefore be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

SCOTT, P. J., concurs.

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

PER CURIAM.

The witness Bouleé volunteered the statement, “I really think the man has tuberculosis now from the effects of that,” referring to the experience which the witness Boulee concluded that the plaintiff had undergone. The defendant excepted to the denial of his motion to strike out this statement. , This exception presents error, as the record does not disclose what the word “that” covered.

The judgment will therefore be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

SCOTT, P. J., concurs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 N.Y.S. 516, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdermott-v-brooklyn-heights-railroad-nyappterm-1905.