Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

94 A.D. 342

Roberge v. Bonner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · decided 1904-05-15

Appeal by the plaintiff, Franklin P. Roberge, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendants, entered in. the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 19th day of February, 1903, upon the verdict of a jury? and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 19th- day of February, 1903, denying the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently February 1947

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1904-05-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Hatch, J.

¶1(dissenting)

¶2I dissent from the prevailing opinion in this case, for the reason that upon the evidence a case was presented as to the existence of the contract which required its submission to the jury. Upon such question the entries made by Mr. Bonner in his memorandum book were competent evidence and bore upon the vital questions in the case. The exclusion of such evidence, therefore, constitutes reversible error.

¶3We are not now concerned with the question as to whether a recovery by the plaintiff can be sustained upon the evidence received, and that which was improperly excluded.

¶4It will be time enough to consider such question after a verdict has been rendered in plaintiff’s favor, if that event ever happens.

¶5I, therefore, think that the judgment should be reversed and a hew trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

¶6Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

/94/ad/342 · .json · Public domain