Legal Opinion
Michel v. Semer
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided May 4, 1923PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Smith, J.:
In this case the trial judge permitted a boy, nine years of age at the time he testified, to testify without having been sworn, under the objection of the defendants.
In Stoppick v. Goldstein (174 App. Div. 306) the opinion in part reads: “By the Code of Criminal Procedure, section 392 (as amd. by Laws of 1892, chap. 279), children actually or apparently under the age of twelve years may testify in special cases without taking an oath; but such evidence is not sufficient to convict, unless corroborated or supported. This, however, is only applicable to criminal cases. No such…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Stoppick v. GoldsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
- Gehl v. Bachmann-Bechtel Brewing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
- Neustadt v. New York City Railway Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1907
- Grace v. WagnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1917
3Cited by5 opinions
- Napiearlski v. PickeringAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1951
- Ranofsky v. FrankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1924
- Salmon v. SundayAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1929
- Fineman v. KrebsAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1959
- People v. MurrayNew York Supreme Court · 1993