Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1912

Bartholdi v. Hickson

Bartholdi v. Hickson
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided June 21, 1912
136 N.Y.S. 92 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Jacob Friedman, of New York City, for appellant., Samuel L. Weyl, of New York City, for respondent.

Bartholdi v. Hickson

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff sues for breach of contract of employment. All of the defendant’s witnesses were in defendant’s employ. It was for the jury, under those circumstances, to say to what extent, if any, their business relationship impaired or destroyed their credibility, and it was error on the part of the trial justice, after charging that “employment is not the basis for the creation or claim of interest,” to refuse to charge that the “jury may infer that, if a witness is in the employ of a litigant and receives a salary from him, that fact may have some bearing upon the testimony.”

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.