Sofranski Bros. v. H. C. F. Koch & Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Sofranski Bros. v. H. C. F. Koch & Co.

147 N.Y.S. 1142

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 7, 1914

StatusPublished

This text of 147 N.Y.S. 1142 (Sofranski Bros. v. H. C. F. Koch & 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

Sofranski Bros. v. H. C. F. Koch & Co., 147 N.Y.S. 1142 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendants’ witness, Miss Edwards, should have been permitted to testify fully as to conversations had by her with the plaintiff concerning the delivery of the ■goods to defendants and the sending of them to defendants, and after her memory had been •exhausted as to the general conversations it was proper to call witness’ attention to particular things that were said. The exclusion of this evidence "was error. Judgment reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

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

PER CURIAM.

The defendants’ witness, Miss Edwards, should have been permitted to testify fully as to conversations had by her with the plaintiff concerning the delivery of the ■goods to defendants and the sending of them to defendants, and after her memory had been •exhausted as to the general conversations it was proper to call witness’ attention to particular things that were said. The exclusion of this evidence "was error. Judgment reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

147 N.Y.S. 1142, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sofranski-bros-v-h-c-f-koch-co-nyappterm-1914.