Case ID: ny-st-rep_36/html/0092-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Myer Rosenstock and Myer Edelmuth, Resp’ts, v. John Heggarty, App’lt.
    
      (City Court of Brooklyn, General Term,
    
    
      Filed January 26, 1891.)
    
    Evidence—Books op account.
    Original memoranda made in books of account by the seller in the presence of the purchaser are admissible in evidence where it appears that the witness has no recollection of the occurrence independently of them.
    
      Appeal from judgment in favor of plaintiffs, entered on the report of a referee.
    Action for goods sold and delivered. The purchases were made by a lady who was introduced by defendant as his wife about twelve years ago, arid he requested that credit be given her on his account.
    On the trial plaintiffs’ salesman testified that he waited on the lady when she was in the store; that he made memoranda of the goods sold in her presence in the books of the firm; identified such memoranda, and stated that he had no recollection of any item, its amount and date, independent of the books. The accounts were then offered in evidence and received over defendant’s objection.
    
      Martin Flanagan (Horace Graves, of counsel), for resp’ts; Geo. F. Alexander, for app’lt.
   Per Curiam.

The books of account were properly admitted evidence under the rule laid down in The National Ulster Co. Bank v. Madden, 114 N. Y., 280, 284; 23 N. Y. State Rep., 220„ and cases there cited. We have examined the other exceptions taken during the trial and find no error. Ho exceptions were filed to the referee’s report under §§ 993 and 994 of the Code, and we are therefore only called upon to review the exceptions taken at the trial. Dainese v. Allen, 36 Superior Court, 98.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Clement, Ch. J., Van Wyck and Osborne, JJ., concur.