Wickers v. Wickers

New York Court of Appeals

Wickers v. Wickers

170 N.E.2d 831, 8 N.Y.2d 1090

DecidedOctober 21, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 170 N.E.2d 831 (Wickers v. Wickers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wickers v. Wickers, 170 N.E.2d 831, 8 N.Y.2d 1090 (N.Y. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. The trial court erred in refusing to permit plaintiff to testify fully with respect to the circumstances surrounding her signing of the release in question. The person who procured the release from plaintiff, having witnessed it and taken her “ Acknowledgment Under Oath ”, was sufficiently identified by the release itself, together with her testimony, to have warranted the admissibility of conversations she had with him at the time she signed the release. No opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Froessel, Van Voorhis, Burke and Foster.

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

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. The trial court erred in refusing to permit plaintiff to testify fully with respect to the circumstances surrounding her signing of the release in question. The person who procured the release from plaintiff, having witnessed it and taken her “ Acknowledgment Under Oath ”, was sufficiently identified by the release itself, together with her testimony, to have warranted the admissibility of conversations she had with him at the time she signed the release. No opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Froessel, Van Voorhis, Burke and Foster.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 N.E.2d 831, 8 N.Y.2d 1090, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wickers-v-wickers-ny-1960.