248 A.D. 152

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Nut-Ola Fat Products, Inc., Appellant.

First Department,

May 29, 1936.

*153Albert M. Gilbert of counsel [Aaron S. Yohalem, Jacob Aks and Bernhard Bloch with him on the brief; Abraham M. Davis, attorney], for the appellant.

Robert P. Beyer, Assistant Attorney-General, of counsel [John J. Bennett, Jr., Attorney-General], for the respondent.

Per Curiam.

The question whether the defendant’s product constituted a substance in imitation of butter or a substance similar to oleomargarine should have been submitted to the jury as an issue of fact. Furthermore, testimony offered by the defendant tending to show that its product was not , a substance in imitation or semblance of butter ” nor a “ similar substance ” to oleomargarine (Agriculture and Markets Law, § 59) was erroneously excluded by the trial court.

The determination of the Appellate Term and the judgment of the Municipal Court should be reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant in all courts to abide the event.

Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.

Determination appealed from and judgment of the Municipal Court unanimously reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant in all courts to abide the event.

People v. Nut-Ola Fat Products, Inc.
248 A.D. 152

Case Details

Name
People v. Nut-Ola Fat Products, Inc.
Decision Date
May 29, 1936
Citations

248 A.D. 152

Jurisdiction
New York

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!