Hyperlawhypertext legal database Mermelstein v. Glass 155 N.Y.S. 216

← Cases

Mermelstein v. Glass

155 N.Y.S. 216 Court Argued October term, 1915, before BIJUR, PAGE, and SHEARN, JJ. Decision date 1915-10-25 English

Contents

Majority

p. 216
MERMELSTEIN v. GLASS.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.
October 25, 1915.)

Headnote

Appeal and Error <@=>1033—Harmless Error—Errors Favorable to Appellant.
An error in the charge, requiring plaintiff to prove facts which were not essential to her recovery, was in defendant’s favor, and in no way prejudiced his case.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 4052-4002; Dec. Dig. <@=51033.]
tg^Eor otbjer cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
Appeal from City Court of New York, Trial Term.
Action by Rosie Mermelstein against Morris H. Glass. From a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff upon a verdict of a jury for $500, and from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Argued October term, 1915, before BIJUR, PAGE, and SHEARN, JJ.
Amos H. Stephens, of New York City (Robert B. Gumming, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
Barnett E. Kopelman, of New York City, for respondent.

Through an error in the charge the plaintiff was required to- prove facts which were not essential to her recovery. The error was in the defendant’s favor, and in no- way prejudiced his case. The cause of action alleged in the complaint was clearly proved, and the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.