From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Spatz v. Pulenskey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 29, 1944
268 App. Div. 1012 (N.Y. App. Div. 1944)

Opinion

December 29, 1944.

Appeal from Supreme Court.


The evidence sustains the verdict of the jury as to the terms of the contract. The Trial Judge excluded the deposition of a witness taken on behalf of defendant. Defendant's attorney in taking this deposition violated the terms of a stipulation between himself and plaintiff's attorney. The violation was quite material and the Trial Judge was fully justified in excluding the deposition. Defendant also contends that the remarks of plaintiff's counsel in the summation were prejudiced and inflammatory. Some of the remarks transgressed the bounds of legitimate argument. Appeals should not be made by attorneys to passion and prejudice in the trial of their causes. We again admonish the Bar that such practices will not be condoned. In the case before us there is some justification for the remarks of plaintiff's counsel. In addition to that defendant took no exception and asked for no ruling from the Trial Judge. Judgments affirmed, with costs. All concur. [See post, p. 1076.]


Summaries of

Spatz v. Pulenskey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 29, 1944
268 App. Div. 1012 (N.Y. App. Div. 1944)
Case details for

Spatz v. Pulenskey

Case Details

Full title:ALVIN P. SPATZ, Respondent, v. JACOB PULENSKEY, Doing Business under the…

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

Date published: Dec 29, 1944

Citations

268 App. Div. 1012 (N.Y. App. Div. 1944)