Case Name: Julius Erlandson, Respondent, v. Frank S. Groh, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1901-06
Citations: 35 Misc. 821
Docket Number: 
Parties: Julius Erlandson, Respondent, v. Frank S. Groh, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 35
Pages: 821–821

Head Matter:
Julius Erlandson, Respondent, v. Frank S. Groh, Appellant.
Appeal from a judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiff in the Municipal Court of the city of Yew York, first district, borough of Manhattan.
William R. Hill, for appellant.
Douglass & Minton, for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
There is nothing in this case except a conflict of evidence, and we see no reason to reverse the conclusion arrived at by the justice. The question put to the witness Hunt as to the condition of the machine at some undesignated time was properly excluded, because the issue was not as to its condition after it had been used by defendant, but as to its original capability for doing the work for which defendant ordered it.
Present: Scott, P. J., Beach and Fitzgerald, JJ.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.