Case Name: REISS v. KIENLE
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1904-05-19
Citations: 88 N.Y.S. 359
Docket Number: 
Parties: REISS v. KIENLE.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 88
Pages: 359–359

Head Matter:
REISS v. KIENLE.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
May 19, 1904.)
1. Trial—Instructions—Instruction on Effect of Verdict.
An instruction that, if the jury should render a verdict against defendant, he would be incarcerated, was not erroneous.
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Eleventh District.
Action by Meyer R. Reiss against Charles H. Kienle. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and TRUAX and SCOTT, JJ.
Engel, Engel & Oppenheimer, for appellant.
F. V. S. Oliver, for respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The questions of fact in the case were fairly presented to the jury. The trial judge did not charge that, if the jury found a verdict for the defendant, it must bear in mind that he is a poor man, "and can be incarcerated," and therefore the exception was not well taken. The charge was that, even if the defendant were a poor man, and not able to pay the amount of the recovery, "if you give him a verdict he could be incarcerated until he does pay." The charge was meaningless. But if we suppose that the judge intended to charge that, if the jury should render a verdict against the defendant, he would be incarcerated such charge was not erroneous. Keller v. Strasburger, 90 N. Y. 379.
Judgment appealed from is affirmed, with costs.