Majority
p. 531(20 Misc. Rep. 697.) KRAUSS et al. v. ABELES. (City Court of New York, General Term. July 15, 1897.) Argued before YAK WYÜK, C. J., and SCHUCHMAH and MCCARTHY, JJ.
Headnote
Witness—Co irr etency.A plaintiff is not barred of recovery because of his interest, where a dispute arose, and only he and defendant were present.
Appeal from trial term.
Action by Richard Krauss and another against Simon Abeles. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Strong & Cadwalader, for appellant.
B. Lewinson, for respondents.
This is entirely a question of fact, and was fairly ■and properly left to the jury. They have believed the plaintiffs’ testimony, and found for them. It is not the rule, and there is no such law, that where a dispute arises, and only the plaintiff and the defendant were present, the plaintiff cannot recover, because he is interested. It is still a question for the jury, under proper instructions, which the appellant availed himself fully of.
Judgment is therefore affirmed, with costs. ' All concur.