Case ID: nys_13/html/0228-01.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

Rosenstook et al. v. Hoggarty.
    
      (City Court of Brooklyn, General Term.
    
    January 26, 1891.)
    1. Documentary Evidence—Books ok Account.
    A witness in an action for goods sold and delivered testified that he remembered making the sales, but could not give the dates or amounts, and that at the time of every sale he made correct entries in his books of account of the details, which he could not remember without looking at the entries. Meld, that such entries were admissible in evidence.
    2. Appeal-Review—Failure to File Exceptions.
    On appeal from a judgment entered on the report of a referee, where no exceptions were filed to the report as provided by Code Civil Proo. N. Y. §§ 993, 994, only exceptions taken at the trial can be reviewed.
    Appeal from judgment on report of referee..
    Action by Myer Bosenstook and Myer Bdelmuth against John Hoggarty for the price of goods sold and delivered. At the trial before a,referee plaintiffs’ salesman testified that he could hot give the dates or amounts of the sales, and only remembered that he made the sales; that he could not remember the details of any sale without looking at entries made by him in plaintiffs’ books of account; that he made the entries at the time of each sale, and that they were correct entries of the details of every sale. The entries were admitted in evidence by the referee, against defendant’s objections, and' defendant excepted. The referee reported in favor of plaintiffs. No exceptions were filed to his report. Defendant appeals from the judgment for plaintiffs, entered on the report.
    Argued before Clement, C. J., and Osborne and Van Wyck, JJ.
    
      George F. Alexander, for appellant. Martin Flanigan, for respondents.
   Per Curiam.

The books of account were properly admitted in evidence under the rule laid down in Bank v. Madden, 114 N. Y. 280, 284, 21 N. E. Rep. 408, and cases there. cited. We have, examined the other exceptions taken during the trial, and find no error. No exceptions were filed to the referee’s report uncler sections 993 arid 994 of the Code, and we are therefore only called upon t'a review the exceptions taken at the trial. Dainese v. Allen, 36 N. Y. Super. Ct. 98. Judgment affirmed, with costs.