Friedman v. Yamner — 97 N.Y.S. 357

Majority

p. 357

FRIEDMAN v. YAMNER.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

January 17, 1906.)

Headnote

Evidence—Conclusions.

The testimony of witness giving in detail a conversation showing a monthly letting cannot be overcome by his conclusion, in another part of his testimony, which is merely the construction he put on the conversation, that there was a verbal lease for a year.

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Fifth District.

Action by Cilly Friedman against Sussman Yamner. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

Reversed.

p. 358

Argued before SCOTT, P. J., and BLANCHARD and DOW-LING, JJ.

Max Brown, for appellant.

Emanuel I. Silberstein, for respondent.

I can find no evidence that a lease was made for a year. - The evidence of the witness Harry Friedman, where he gives in detail the conversation with defendant, shows a monthly letting. This cannot be changed to a lease for a year by the witness’ conclusion in another part of his testimony that the defendant took a verbal lease for a year. This is merely the construction he puts on the conversation, which he detailed previously, and which shows a monthly letting.

The complaint should have been dismissed, and the judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.