McDermott v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

McDermott v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad

94 N.Y.S. 516

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided June 22, 1905·Published

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.

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

Pincite

94 N.Y.S. 516 (McDermott v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.