Opinion
March 16, 1949.
Appeal from Schenectady Special Term.
Present — Foster, P.J., Heffernan, Deyo, Santry and Bergan, JJ.
The action seeks a determination of the title to streets by the owners of lots sold by reference to a map which laid out both the lots and streets. The witness is an officer of the grantor of the parties, a corporation. The materiality of the testimony is not demonstrated in the moving papers. It is said merely that the witness is "familiar with the policies" of the company in developing and maintaining the streets and selling the lots and is "familiar with the facts relating to the title". These generalities do not show materiality of the testimony sought to be taken, which must be clearly demonstrated. Familiarity is not necessarily a test of competent testimony. Even if the moving papers be given a more liberal construction than seems possible, the witness could give no competent interpretation of the written instruments and documents upon which the title to the parties and their right to the streets depend. Order unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.