Warren, Gzowski & Co. v. Forst & Co.

Warren, Gzowski & Co. v. Forst & Co.
Collection
Supreme Court Judgments
Date
1912-05-07
Report
(1912) 46 SCR 642
Judges
Fitzpatrick, Charles; Davies, Louis Henry; Idington, John; Duff, Lyman Poore; Brodeur, Louis-Philippe
On appeal from
Ontario
Subjects
Evidence
Decision Content
Supreme Court of Canada
Warren, Gzowski & Co. v. Forst & Co., (1912) 46 S.C.R. 642
Date: 1912-05-07
Warren, Gzowski & Co.
and
Forst & Co.
1912: March 26, 27; 1912: May 7.
Present: Sir Charles Fitzpatrick C.J. and Davies, Idington, Duff and Brodeur JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO.
Evidence—Telephone conversation—Corroboration.
APPEAL from a decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario[1], affirming the judgment of a Divisional Court[2], by which a verdict for the plaintiff was set aside and a new trial ordered.
The action in this case arose out of a stock transaction which was initiated by a telephone conversation between the plaintiff Gzowski and a member of defendants’ firm. There was a dispute as to the date and terms of this conversation and, at the trial, the defendants tendered the evidence of their stenographer, who was in their office where the telephone was when it took place. The trial judge refused this evidence on the ground that the stenographer could not know who the other party to the conversation was. The verdict for the plaintiff was set aside and a new trial ordered on account of the rejection of this evidence.
The Supreme Court of Canada, after hearing counsel for both parties, reserved judgment, and on a subsequent day dismissed the appeal with costs.
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Nesbitt K.C. and Arnoldi K.C. for the appellants.
Macdonnel K.C. for the respondents.
[1] 24 Ont. L.R. 282.
[2] 22 Ont. L.R. 441.