Case ID: nys_113/html/0835-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SEABURY, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

SKRILLOW v. RUBONOVITZ.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    December 9, 1908.)
    Evidence (§ 3G6)—Foreign Judgment—Authentication.
    Where, in an action on a judgment recovered in another state, the judgment roll offered in evidence was authenticated as prescribed by Rev. St. U. S. § 905 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 677), it was admissible, though the authentication did not comply with Code Civ. Proc. § 952, which relates only to the authentication o£ copies of records of courts of foreign countries.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Evidence, Dec. Dig. § 366.*]
    Appeal from City Court of New York, Trial Term.
    Action by Morris Skrillow against Marks Rubonovitz. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
    Reversed, and new trial ordered.
    Argued before GIEDERSLEEVE, P. J., and MacEEAN and SEA-BURY, JJ.
    Aaron Jablow, for appellant.
    Samuel Fine, for respondent.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   SEABURY, J.

The plaintiff sued upon a judgment recovered in favor of his assignor against the defendant in the court of common pleas of McKean county, in the state of Pennsylvania. The only question presented for review upon this appeal is the ruling of the trial justice in excluding the judgment roll offered by the plaintiff.

The court excluded the judgment roll upon the ground that it was not properly exemplified, under section 952 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The judgment roll was not exemplified in the manner prescribed by section 952 of the Code of Civil Procedure, but was authenticated in the manner provided by section 905 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 677). It should have been received in evidence. Section 952 of the Code of Civil Procedure only provides for the authentication of copies of records of courts of foreign countries, and has no application to the records of courts of other states of the Union. Trebilcox v. McAlpine, 46 Hun, 469, 471, 472; Van Deventer v. Mortimer, 56 Misc. Rep. 650, 651, 107 N. Y. Supp. 564. Provision for the reception as evidence of the records of courts of other states in this country is made by section 905 of the Revised Statutes of the United States.

The judgment appealed from is reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to. abide the event. All concur.