165 Misc. 101

Robert Gulotta, Respondent, v. Fifth Avenue Coach Company, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

November 23, 1937.

Henry J. Smith [J. M. Sheen of counsel], for the appellant.

Sol Silverman, for the respondent.

*102Per Curiam.

While it was proper, and so conceded by defendant’s counsel, to ask the plaintiff whether he had told defendant’s driver after the accident that he, the plaintiff, had not been hurt as a result of the collision, the ruling permitting the conversation between plaintiff and the driver to establish defendant’s liability presents reversible error.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

All concur. Present — Lydon, Levy and Frankenthaler, JJ.

Gulotta v. Fifth Avenue Coach Co.
165 Misc. 101

Case Details

Name
Gulotta v. Fifth Avenue Coach Co.
Decision Date
Nov 23, 1937
Citations

165 Misc. 101

Jurisdiction
New York

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!