Hyperlawhypertext legal database Wiedman v. Kinzly 135 N.Y.S. 1150

← Cases

Wiedman v. Kinzly

135 N.Y.S. 1150 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1912-05-01 English

Decision Majority — PER CURIAM. · Dissent — McLENNAN, P. J.,

Contents
p. 1150
WIEDMAN, Respondent, v. KINZLY, Appellant.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
May 1, 1912.)

Headnote

Action by Edward Wiedman, an infant, etc., against Frank Kinzly.

Judgment and order reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event. Held, that the court committed prejudicial error in excluding the testimony of the chief of police, tending to show that the defendant had been directed to disperse people congregating on street corners, and in view of the charge of the court on the subject of malice this error is so prejudicial as to require a reversal.

dissents, upon the ground that the question of malice was not involved, and the evidence referred to was therefore properly excluded, and that the charge of the court in that respect was not excepted to, and, therefore, the question of error is not before this court.