Morton v. Smith Hoisting Co.
This text of 161 A.D. 939 (Morton v. Smith Hoisting 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 and order reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the event. As the witness Winkky was the only witness who testified positively to contact between the timber and the tierods, causing one of the latter to fall, if he gave other testimony on a previous trial to which his attention was at this time called, and he denied recollection that he so testified, counsel should have been permitted to introduce such testimony in evidence. (Weeks v. Fox, 3 T. & C. 354; Palmeri v. Manhattan El. R. Co., 39 N. Y. St. Repr. 23; Kelly v. Cohoes Knitting Co., 8 App. Div. 156.) This the court refused to permit him to do. Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Rich and Stapleton, JJ., concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
161 A.D. 939, 145 N.Y.S. 1134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morton-v-smith-hoisting-co-nyappdiv-1914.