People v. McDermott Dairy Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. McDermott Dairy Co.

132 N.Y.S. 329

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 22, 1911

StatusPublished

This text of 132 N.Y.S. 329 (People v. McDermott Dairy Co.) 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

People v. McDermott Dairy Co., 132 N.Y.S. 329 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

GIEGERICH, J.

[1] These actions were brought to recover penalties for the sale of adulterated milk, as defined by .the statute (Agricultural Law, § 52). The evidence adduced by the plaintiff showed that the milk was not up to the standard fixed by the statute, and this was the only issue in the case, since it is immaterial whether the deficiency in quality is due to natural causes or otherwise. People v. Bowen, 182 N. Y. 1, 6, 74 N. E. 489.

[2] The testimony offered by the defendant as to the analysis was ' incompetent, since the chemist who testified had not himself made the' analysis, the result of which he undertook to give. The trial court was not at liberty to disregard the only competent testimony in the case, and should have rendered judgment for the plaintiff. People v. Laesser, 79 App. Div. 384, 386, 79 N. Y. Supp. 470.

Judgments reversed, and new trials ordered,' with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

GIEGERICH, J.

[1] These actions were brought to recover penalties for the sale of adulterated milk, as defined by .the statute (Agricultural Law, § 52). The evidence adduced by the plaintiff showed that the milk was not up to the standard fixed by the statute, and this was the only issue in the case, since it is immaterial whether the deficiency in quality is due to natural causes or otherwise. People v. Bowen, 182 N. Y. 1, 6, 74 N. E. 489.

[2] The testimony offered by the defendant as to the analysis was ' incompetent, since the chemist who testified had not himself made the' analysis, the result of which he undertook to give. The trial court was not at liberty to disregard the only competent testimony in the case, and should have rendered judgment for the plaintiff. People v. Laesser, 79 App. Div. 384, 386, 79 N. Y. Supp. 470.

Judgments reversed, and new trials ordered,' with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 N.Y.S. 329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mcdermott-dairy-co-nyappterm-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack