Koropjeck v. Bohack

Full title: TESSIE KOROPJECK, Respondent, v . HENRY C. BOHACK, Appellant

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 1, 1914

160 App. Div. 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1914)

Opinion

January, 1914.

Present — Ingraham, P.J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.; Ingraham, P.J., and McLaughlin, J., dissented.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion.

INGRAHAM, P.J., and McLAUGHLIN, J., dissent on the ground that it was error to refuse to charge the defendant's fifth request, which is as follows:

"The fact that Bennett was not called by either side raises no more presumption in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant than it does in favor of the defendant and against the plaintiff."