Poplawski v. Cook

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Poplawski v. Cook

124 Misc. 668, 208 N.Y.S. 803, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 722

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 19, 1925

StatusPublished

This text of 124 Misc. 668 (Poplawski v. Cook) 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

Poplawski v. Cook, 124 Misc. 668, 208 N.Y.S. 803, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 722 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

One of the essential elements in the proper conduct of a trial in our courts is a fair opportunity to examine witnesses and cross-examine them in order to arrive at the truth of the facts which are the basis of the litigation. Where the examination must be necessarily conducted through an interpreter, the services of a competent and a qualified one should be secured, because it is through a competent and qualified interpreter that the truth can be arrived at. If in this case it was impossible, as the record [669]*669shows, to secure one, then the trial should have been suspended and the case remanded to the calendar. (Mennella v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co., 43 Misc. 5.) The motion for withdrawal of a juror made by the defendant should have been granted.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to the appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Bijur, Mullan and Cotillo, JJ.

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

Per Curiam:

One of the essential elements in the proper conduct of a trial in our courts is a fair opportunity to examine witnesses and cross-examine them in order to arrive at the truth of the facts which are the basis of the litigation. Where the examination must be necessarily conducted through an interpreter, the services of a competent and a qualified one should be secured, because it is through a competent and qualified interpreter that the truth can be arrived at. If in this case it was impossible, as the record [669]*669shows, to secure one, then the trial should have been suspended and the case remanded to the calendar. (Mennella v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co., 43 Misc. 5.) The motion for withdrawal of a juror made by the defendant should have been granted.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to the appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Bijur, Mullan and Cotillo, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 Misc. 668, 208 N.Y.S. 803, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 722, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/poplawski-v-cook-nyappterm-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack