Case Name: HEIMERDINGER v. FINELITE
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1895-01-12
Citations: 31 N.Y.S. 1128
Docket Number: 
Parties: HEIMERDINGER v. FINELITE.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 31
Pages: 1128–1128

Head Matter:
HEIMERDINGER v. FINELITE.
(City Court of New York, General Term.
January 12, 1895.)
Action by Morris Heimerdinger against Jacob Finelite.
Morris Goodhart, for appellant.
Otto Horwltz, for respondent.

Opinion:
EHRLICH, C. J.
The defendant, who was sued as indorser of a promissory note, pleaded that at the time of the indorsement he was of unsound mind, and incapable of understanding the nature of his act, or yielding a free assent thereto. The proofs showed that prior to the indorsement the defendant had met with an accident, but they fell far short of establishing that he was non compos mentis. Indeed, they were so slight that a verdict in favor of the defendant on his plea would have to be set aside as against the evidence; and, in such a case, the consensus of authority is that the trial judge may direct the only verdict the proofs admit of, which, in this instance, was that directed in favor of the plaintiff. There was no error in excluding evidence, and nothing in the case which requires a new trial. The judgment must therefore be affirmed, with costs. FITZSIMONS, J., concurs. CONLAN, J., dissents.