From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Marshall v. Riley

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jun 1, 1902
38 Misc. 770 (N.Y. App. Term 1902)

Opinion

June, 1902.

F.L. Taylor, for appellants.

F.W. Fielding, for respondent.


At the trial the defendants endeavored to show by the testimony of two witnesses who had witnessed and described plaintiff's condition that at the time the plaintiff was ordered to leave the lighter as claimed by him, and at the time he voluntarily left defendants' employ, as claimed by defendants, he was drunk. It seems that all testimony upon this point was excluded upon the ground that it called for a conclusion and that the witnesses should have been qualified. This was error within the rule as laid down in People v. Eastwood, 14 N.Y. 562; People v. Gaynor, 33 A.D. 98; Donoho v. Metropolitan St. R. Co., 30 Misc. 433.

The judgment must be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellants, to abide the event.

GILDERSLEEVE and MACLEAN, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellants, to abide event.


Summaries of

Marshall v. Riley

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jun 1, 1902
38 Misc. 770 (N.Y. App. Term 1902)
Case details for

Marshall v. Riley

Case Details

Full title:ALONZO MARSHALL, Respondent, v . JAMES G. RILEY et al., Appellants

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term

Date published: Jun 1, 1902

Citations

38 Misc. 770 (N.Y. App. Term 1902)