Conner v. Flaska, 32 N.M. 162, 252 P. 1001 (1927)

Jan. 7, 1927 · Supreme Court of New Mexico · No. 3026
32 N.M. 162, 252 P. 1001
CONNER v. FLASKA et ux

[No. 3026,

Jan. 7, 1927]

CONNER v. FLASKA et ux

[252 Pac. 1001]

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

Section 44G7, Code 1915, gives a party litigant the right to address the jury through counsel, and a denial of that right by the trial court is reversible error.

[1] 38 Cyc p. 1470 n. 24.

Appeal from District Court, Bernalillo county; Ryan, Judge.

Action by C. PI. Conner against John Flaska and wife. From, a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

T. J. Mabry, of Albuquerque, for appellant.

George C. Taylor, of Albuquerque, for appellees.

OPINON OP THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, plaintiff below, sued to recover $75, a balance for professional services *163rendered. The jury found against him, and judgment followed. He complains here that, over his objection and exception, the court refused to allow his counsel to address the jury. This seems to ha.ve been the denial of a right which a party litigant enjoys under Gode 1915, §4467, which reads:

“Every plaintiff or defendant shall be entitled to be heard before the jury by an attorney, and if there be but one plaintiff or defendant, by two, and when there are several defendants having- the same or separate defenses and appearing- by the same or different attorneys, the court» shall, before argument, arrange their order.”

See Territory v. Sherron, 11 N. M. 515, 70 P. 562.

Because of this error, the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial; and it is so ordered.

PARKER, C. J., and B10KLET and WATSON, JJ., concur.