From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coppola v. Melvin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 1, 1934
241 App. Div. 611 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)

Opinion

January, 1934.


Judgment reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event. The admission of the police blotter (Defendant's Exhibit B) in its entirety was prejudicial error ( Johnson v. Lutz, 253 N.Y. 124); even assuming, without deciding, that a part of that exhibit was admissible on the theory of a prior inconsistent declaration, the rest of the entries were not admissible. It was likewise error to refuse plaintiff's request to charge at folio 289. (Code of Ordinances, chap. 24, art. 2, § 11, subd. 9; Police Traffic Regulations, art. 2, § 15; Martin v. Herzog, 228 N.Y. 164, 168.) Lazansky, P.J., Hagarty, Carswell, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Coppola v. Melvin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 1, 1934
241 App. Div. 611 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)
Case details for

Coppola v. Melvin

Case Details

Full title:GASPARE COPPOLA, Appellant, v. SAMUEL MELVIN, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 1, 1934

Citations

241 App. Div. 611 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)

Citing Cases

Yeargans v. Yeargans

For a discussion as to the purpose of section 374-a of the Civil Practice Act see Williams v. Alexander ( 309…

Sinkevich v. Cenkus

The report did not state that there were any eyewitnesses to the accident nor that the plaintiffs had…