From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arico v. New York Central Railroad Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 1, 1933
240 App. Div. 721 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)

Opinion

June, 1933.


Judgment and order reversed on the law and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event. The admission of the evidence of the six and one-half year old boy, Rinaldi, without his being required to take the oath as a witness, constituted prejudicial error. ( Gehl v. Bachmann-Bechtel Brewing Co., 156 App. Div. 51.) There was no other evidence to support the plaintiff's theory of how the accident happened. Even if there were, we could not say that the jury were uninfluenced by the incompetent testimony. It is difficult to discover any theory upon which the plaintiff may recover, but as further proof may be produced on another trial, in reversing the judgment and order we grant a new trial. Lazansky, P.J., Young, Carswell, Scudder and Davis, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Arico v. New York Central Railroad Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 1, 1933
240 App. Div. 721 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)
Case details for

Arico v. New York Central Railroad Company

Case Details

Full title:FRANK ARICO, as Administrator, etc., of RALPH ARICO, Deceased, Respondent…

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

Date published: Jun 1, 1933

Citations

240 App. Div. 721 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)

Citing Cases

Fineman v. Krebs

The infant's testimony is the only testimony in the record bearing on the question of liability. Unsworn…