Belter v. Van Winkle
This text of 234 A.D. 886 (Belter v. Van Winkle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Judgment and order denying motion to set aside verdict reversed upon the law and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event, for error in the admission of testimony of the physician who examined plaintiff for the purpose of testifying and not for treatment, which was based upon her statements to the doctor of conditions from which she claimed to be suffering, and which were [887]*887wholly subjective. (Davidson v. Cornell, 132 N. Y. 228.) There were also hypothetical questions put to this medical witness which were based wholly or in part upon hearsay or information obtained from the plaintiff; and the testimony as to the permanency of alleged injuries or suffering was error in so far as it related to subjective conditions detailed to the doctor by the plaintiff. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Seudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
234 A.D. 886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/belter-v-van-winkle-nyappdiv-1931.