
    KLEIN v. WILLIAMS et al.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    May 17, 1910.)
    Evidence (§ 434)—Validity—Fraud—Admissibility.
    In an action on a check against the maker and indorser, the exclusion of evidence that the check was given as a result of false representations was error.
    (Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Evidence, Cent. Dig. § 2016; Dec. Dig, § 434.*]
    Appeal from City Court of New York, Trial Term.
    Action by Minnie Klein against Arthur From- a judgment on a directed verdict by the court in favor of plaintiff against both defendants, defendant Williams appeals.
    Reversed, and new trial ordered.
    Argued before SEABURY, GUY, and BIJUR, JJ.
    Dana & Clarkson, for appellant.
    Strauss & Singer, for respondent.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   SEABURY, J.

Action upon a check made by defendant Williams to the order of defendant Ealk, and indorsed and delivered by the latter to the plaintiff. The defendant Williams pleaded that he was induced to make the check through false representations made by the defendant Falk. The learned court below excluded evidence tending to establish that the check was given as a result of false representations. The exclusion of this evidence was error, as was also the act of the court in directing a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, who was the only witness in support of her improbable claim. Engle v. Hyman, 54 Misc. Rep. 251, 104 N. Y. Supp. 390.

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