Case Name: Sam Saltzman, Appellant, v. City of New York, Respondent. Jerome Poultry Corporation, Appellant, v. City of New York, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1948-02-17
Citations: 191 Misc. 724
Docket Number: 
Parties: Sam Saltzman, Appellant, v. City of New York, Respondent. Jerome Poultry Corporation, Appellant, v. City of New York, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 191
Pages: 724–726

Head Matter:
Sam Saltzman, Appellant, v. City of New York, Respondent. Jerome Poultry Corporation, Appellant, v. City of New York, Respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
February 17, 1948.
Robert Halpern and Milton E. Sahn for appellants.
John P. McGrath, Corporation Counsel (David M. Fuchs and Seymour B. Quel of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
Memorandum Per Curiam.
The enactment sought to be questioned is a reasonable exercise of the police power and is constitutional. The evidence of the prior conviction of an " infraction " or " offense " was not competent (Civ. Prac. Act, § 350; N. Y. War Emergency Act, § 100, subd. [d]; L. 1942, ch. 544). It cannot be said this evidence on the sharp issue of weight and credibility of plaintiffs' testimony did not prejudice plaintiffs. Accordingly, the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. (Hull v. Littauer, 162 N. Y. 569.)
The judgments should be reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellants to abide the event.
Hammer, Church and Eder, JJ., concur.
Judgments reversed, etc.