Opinion
June, 1898.
Abraham H. Sarasohn, for appellants.
Jacob Rieger, for respondent.
We think the justice below had no power to modify the judgment as he did, and for that reason it should be reversed. We also think that the question put to the plaintiff on cross-examination, "Didn't you know as a cloakmaker from an experience of four years when a man is hired for a certain time a writing is given, and if a writing is not given he is hired from week to week?" should have been allowed, as it had some bearing upon his credibility in view of the nature of the arrangement with the defendants to which he testified.
Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellants to abide the event.
Present: BEEKMAN, P.J., GILDERSLEEVE and GIEGERICH, JJ.
Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellants to abide event.