Saltzman v. City of New York
This text of 191 Misc. 724 (Saltzman v. City of New York) 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.
Opinion
The enactment sought to be questioned is a reasonable exercise of the police power and is constitutional. The evidence of the prior conviction of an “ infraction ” or “ offense ” was not competent (Civ. Prac. Act, § 350; N. Y. War Emergency Act, § 100, subd. [d]; L. 1942, [726]*726ch. 544). It cannot be said this evidence on the sharp issue of weight and credibility of plaintiffs’ testimony did not prejudice plaintiffs. Accordingly, the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. (Hull v. Littauer, 162 N. Y. 569.)
The judgments should be reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellants to abide the event.
Hammer, Church and Eder, JJ., concur.
Judgments reversed, etc.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
191 Misc. 724, 78 N.Y.S.2d 407, 1948 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2255, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saltzman-v-city-of-new-york-nyappterm-1948.