Cunningham v. Heidelburger
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Appeal from City Court of New York. Action by Mamie Cunningham against Joseph Heidelburger. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtBischoff, J.
The question asked by plaintiff’s counsel, in the course of his examination of jurors, “Do you know Mr. Frank V. Johnson, attorney for the Fidelity Insurance Company in this case?” was most prejudicial in character, and, the objectionable matter having been introduced in such a way as to negative any legitimate purpose, a new trial should be had, in tíre interests of substantial justice. Manigold v. B. R. T. Co., 81 App. Div. 381, 80 N. Y. Supp. 861; Cosselmon v. Dunfee, 172 N. Y. 507, 65 N. E. 494; Grant v. N. R. S. Co., 100 App. Div. 234, 237, 91 N. Y. Supp. 805; Lipschutz v. Ross (Sup.) 84…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Cosselmon v. . DunfeeNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
- Manigold v. Black River Traction Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
- Grant v. National Railway Spring Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
- Lipschutz v. RossAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1903
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hollis v. United States Glass Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Prager v. GlanzerAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1908