
    (38 Misc. Rep. 753.)
    ROSENBERG v. GOLDSTEIN et al.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    May, 1902.)
    1. Best Evidence — Judgment Recokd — Res Judicata
    On the trial of an action for the price of goods sold, the buyer’s attorney offered to prove by his own testimony that in a previous action by the buyer against the seller the seller had counterclaimed the cause of action now sued on, and that the court had rendered judgment for the buyer, thus dismissing the counterclaim. Bold, that an objection on the ground that the record of the former judgment was the best evidence was properly sustained.
    ¶ 1. See Evidence, vol. 20, Cent. Dig. §§ 477, 537.
    
      Appeal from municipal court, borough of Manhattan, Fifth district.
    Action by Saul Rosenberg against Jacob Goldstein and others. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendants appeal.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and TRUAX and GIRDERSLEEVE, JJ.
    Aaronstamm & Chorosh, for appellants.
    S. Manheimer, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by defendants from a judgment of the municipal court, Fifth district, in favor of plaintiff. The pleadings are oral. The action is brought for goods sold and delivered, the answer is a general denial, and a demand for a bill of particulars. The only witnesses were the plaintiff and the defendants’ attorney. The plaintiff took the stand, and proved the sale and delivery of the goods. On his cross-examination he was asked if defendants had not obtained a judgment for $75 against him in another action, to which he replied in the affirmative, but added that he paid the same. The defendants’ attorney then took the stand, and offered to prove by his own oral testimony that a previous action had been 'brought by the defendants herein, Goldstein and Lippman, against the plaintiff herein, Rosenberg, for $75, money loaned, in the municipal court, Fourth district, and judgment obtained for defendants herein, said Goldstein and Lippman; that in that action Rosenberg had set up, as a counterclaim, the cause of action pleaded in the case •at bar; that the justice gave judgment for Goldstein and Lippman for the full amount of their claim, thus dismissing said counterclaim. Plaintiff’s counsel objected, on the ground that the record was the ‘best evidence. This objection was sustained, and defendants ex■cepted.

Defendants’ counsel made no attempt to offer to introduce the record, or any copy thereof, in evidence, nor did he move to amend his answer by setting up the defense of res adjudicata. We are of ■the opinion that the ruling of the justice was correct.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.  