Winder v. Pollack

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Winder v. Pollack

151 N.Y.S. 870

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 4, 1915

StatusPublished

This text of 151 N.Y.S. 870 (Winder v. Pollack) 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

Winder v. Pollack, 151 N.Y.S. 870 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

SHEARN, J.

The action was brought to recover $237.84, balance due for merchandise sold and delivered. One item was in dispute, that of October 10, 1914, consisting of 24 ladies’ coats, át $6 each. Defendant also claimed payment in full by a check for $106.

[1, 2] As to the defense of payment, it was uncontradicted that the check was deposited in regular course, but came back from the bank dishonored. To resist the claim of delivery of the 24 coats, the court permitted defendant to introduce in evidence his books of account, to show the negative fact that they contained no entry of the receipt of the coats, and his bookkeeper was permitted to testify that the books contained no such entry. Obviously this was error (Linden v. Thieriot, 96 App. Div. 256, 89 N. Y. Supp. 273), and seriously prejudicial in a case where the issue of delivery was sharply contested and was submitted to a jury.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

SHEARN, J.

The action was brought to recover $237.84, balance due for merchandise sold and delivered. One item was in dispute, that of October 10, 1914, consisting of 24 ladies’ coats, át $6 each. Defendant also claimed payment in full by a check for $106.

[1, 2] As to the defense of payment, it was uncontradicted that the check was deposited in regular course, but came back from the bank dishonored. To resist the claim of delivery of the 24 coats, the court permitted defendant to introduce in evidence his books of account, to show the negative fact that they contained no entry of the receipt of the coats, and his bookkeeper was permitted to testify that the books contained no such entry. Obviously this was error (Linden v. Thieriot, 96 App. Div. 256, 89 N. Y. Supp. 273), and seriously prejudicial in a case where the issue of delivery was sharply contested and was submitted to a jury.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

151 N.Y.S. 870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/winder-v-pollack-nyappterm-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack