Opinion

Gorham Co. v. United Engineering & Contracting Co.

  • 202 N.Y. 342
  • 95 N.E. 805
  • 1911 N.Y. LEXIS 1023
Court
New York Court of Appeals
Filed
Jun 13, 1911
Status
Published
Author
Gray
On the bench
Hiscock, Gray
Cited by
7 cases

The opinion

Gray, J.

I concur with my brother Hiscock in the conclusion which he reaches that there should be a new trial of this action; but it is upon the sole ground that it was error to admit in evidence the proceeding instituted by the superintendent of the building department against the plaintiff and its lessor. The proceeding was personal as against them and the error in making it a part of the plaintiff’s case cannot be said to have been without prejudice to the defendant; inasmuch as the proceeding had determined a fact of serious importance. The evidence was not necessary to make out a case under the contract sued upon. I think that the defendant is entitled to a new trial, in which the case may be submitted to the jury without this prejudicial evidence.

Cullen, Ch. J., Vann, Chase and Collin, JJ., concur with Hiscock, J.; Gray, J., concurs in result in memorandum, with whom Willard Bartlett, J., concurs.

Judgment reversed, etc.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.