INKELIS v. LEHMAN


2 Misc.2d 398 (1956)

Sidney Inkelis, an Infant, by Isidore Inkelis, His Guardian ad Litem, Appellant, v. Jack Lehman, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department.

June 28, 1956.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Veit E. Kaufmann and Eleanor K. Friedman for appellant.

Albert P. Thill and Thomas F. Keane for respondent.

PETTE and DI GIOVANNA, JJ., concur; HART, J., taking no part.


Per Curiam.

It was error to receive the unsworn testimony of a 10-year-old infant. However, we are of the opinion that this eyewitness to the accident should have been sworn since her voir dire disclosed sufficient capacity, intelligence and understanding of the difference between truth and falsehood. She was sensitive of the fact that failure to tell the truth would expose her to punishment but her unawareness of the precise punishment or the agency...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases