From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Graves v. American Express

Supreme Court, Appellate Term Second Department
Nov 24, 1997
175 Misc. 2d 285 (N.Y. App. Term 1997)

Opinion

November 24, 1997

Appeal from the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Diana A. Johnson, J.).

Sedgwick, Detert, Moran Arnold, New York City ( Jack Gross and Paul Milberg of counsel), for appellant.

Velda Graves, respondent pro se.


MEMORANDUM.

Judgment unanimously reversed, without costs, and matter remanded to the court below for a new trial.

Cross-examination of an adverse witness is a matter of right in every trial of a disputed issue of fact ( Friedel v. Board of Regents, 296 N.Y. 347, 352; Hill v. Arnold, 226 A.D.2d 232). Also, cross-examination is the principal means by which the believability of a witness and the truth of testimony is tested ( Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308, 315-316).

A review of the record on appeal indicates that the court below prohibited defendant from cross-examining plaintiff since it did not have witnesses available for plaintiff to cross-examine. We find that the court below erred in its determination that defendant's ability to cross-examine plaintiff was contingent upon defendant presenting witnesses for plaintiff to cross-examine. Although the procedures in Small Claims Court are relaxed, the rules of substantive law must be followed and a person's constitutional right to due process of law includes the basic right to cross-examine witnesses (CCA 1804; Friedel v. Board of Regents, supra).

KASSOFF, P.J., ARONIN and CHETTA, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Graves v. American Express

Supreme Court, Appellate Term Second Department
Nov 24, 1997
175 Misc. 2d 285 (N.Y. App. Term 1997)
Case details for

Graves v. American Express

Case Details

Full title:VELDA GRAVES, Respondent, v. AMERICAN EXPRESS, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term Second Department

Date published: Nov 24, 1997

Citations

175 Misc. 2d 285 (N.Y. App. Term 1997)

Citing Cases

Singh v. Ramnandan

It is well settled that "[c]ross-examination of adverse witnesses is a matter of right in every trial of a…

Rizopoulos v. Cartelli

Substantial justice was not done between the parties (UDCA 1804, 1807). While plaintiff was allowed to call…