Steiner v. City of New York

Full title: PEARL STEINER, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Apr 18, 1994

203 A.D.2d 450 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

610 N.Y.S.2d 328

Opinion

April 18, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vinik, J.).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not err in excluding from evidence the two photographs marked exhibits 3 and 4 for identification. The curtain rod in the photographs was not a proper comparative object and the photographs did not serve to illustrate or measure the depth of the depression in the sidewalk where the plaintiff fell with any degree of accuracy (see, 29 Am Jur 2d, Evidence, § 793; 3 Wigmore, Evidence § 798 [Chadbourne rev 1970]). Lawrence, J.P., O'Brien, Joy and Florio, JJ., concur.