Ahnert v. Union Railway Co.
AHNERT v. UNION RY. CO. OF NEW YORK CITY
Ahnert v. Union Ry. Co., 110 N.Y.S. 376 (1908)
Headnotes
Evidence—Competency—Similar Evidence of Adverse Party.
Opinion testimony of plaintiff’s witness, though ordinarily inadmissible, was rendered competent by defendant’s cross-examination of plaintiff along the same lines and over plaintiff’s objection.
Summary
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of the Bronx, Second District.
Action by Carl H. Ahnert against the Union Railway Company of New York City. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
PER CURIAM.
The opinion testimony asked of plaintiff’s witness, to which defendant objected, would ordinarily have been inadmissible; but defendant’s cross-examination of the plaintiff along the same lines over plaintiff’s objection opened the door to otherwise incompetent proof. Van Ingen v. Mail & Express Pub. Co., 156 N. Y. 376, 388 , 50 N. E. 979 .
Judgment affirmed, with costs.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 0 cases
No case in this database cites this case.