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

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that a stenographer who cannot identify the other party to a telephone conversation cannot provide admissible corroborative evidence; exclusion of that evidence justified setting aside the verdict and ordering a new trial.

Citation: (1912) 46 SCR 642
Parties: Appellant/plaintiff: Warren, Gzowski & Co.; Respondent/defendant: Forst & Co.
Court: Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 7 May 1912
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome: Appeal dismissed with costs; order for new trial affirmed.
Legal Topics: Telephone Conversation Evidence, Corroboration, Admissibility of Witness Testimony, Identification of Parties to Telephone Calls
Source Language: English

Evidence Telephone Conversation Evidence Corroboration Admissibility of Witness Testimony Identification of Parties to Telephone Calls

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

Warren, Gzowski & Co.

Appellant/plaintiff

Forst & Co.

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

1 Whether a stenographer present at defendants' office when a telephone conversation occurred could give admissible evidence to identify or corroborate the conversation
2 Whether the trial judge erred in excluding the stenographer's evidence
3 Whether exclusion of that evidence justified setting aside the verdict and ordering a new trial

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; order for new trial affirmed.

Orders

Appeal dismissed with costs.
Order of the Court of Appeal and Divisional Court setting aside the verdict and ordering a new trial affirmed.