
    EILENBERG et al. v. WAX.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.
    February 20, 1913.)
    Fbaud (§ 55)—Actions—Admission of Evidence.
    In an action for damages by alleged false representations inducing plaintiff to deposit a check resulting in a loss, defendant was entitled to give evidence as to the nature of the transaction.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Fraud, Cent. Dig. § 52; Dec. Dig. $ 55.*]
    Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Second District.
    Action by Rubin .Eilenberg against Max Wax. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed, and new trial granted.
    Argued January term, 1913, before SEABURY, LEHMAN, and PAGE, JJ.
    Edward E. Rosenblume, of Brooklyn, for appellant.
    Israel M. Lerner, of New York City, for respondent.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   PER CURIAM.

This is an action to recover damages for alleged fraudulent representations. Whether or not the defendant had made false representations to the plaintiff to induce him to deposit a check for $50 could only be fairly determined after the parties had each been permitted to testify to their version of the transaction. The learned court below excluded the evidence of the defendant on this question. That ruling necessitates a new trial.

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