Callaghan v. Giuffre

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Callaghan v. Giuffre

44 A.D.2d 631, 353 N.Y.S.2d 577, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5359

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 28, 1974

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 44 A.D.2d 631 (Callaghan v. Giuffre) 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.

Bluebook

Callaghan v. Giuffre, 44 A.D.2d 631, 353 N.Y.S.2d 577, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5359 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, entered January 30, 1973 in Ulster County, upon a verdict rendered at a Trial Term in favor of defendant. Plaintiff sustained serious personal injuries when the motorcycle he was operating struck the left front wheel well of defendant’s automobile as the latter vehicle emerged from a private driveway onto the public highway. The accident occurred on July 2, 1971 at 10:30 P.M., the road was dry and the weather clear. Testimony concerning the happening of the accident was in sharp dispute. The jury chose to accept that version offered by defendant, and there is ample evidence in the record to support a finding that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent. Plaintiff also argues that error was committed in permitting two part-time police officers to testify as to their opinion of the speed of the motorcycle prior to the accident. Such testimony was neither remote nor improper. The record is clear that their testimony was offered not as expert testimony, but as lay opinion, and thus perfectly acceptable (People v. Olsen, 22 N Y 2d 230). The court’s charge to the jury was clear and complete in all phases, and there were no exceptions to it. Judgment affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Staley, Jr., Cooke, Sweeney and Kane, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, entered January 30, 1973 in Ulster County, upon a verdict rendered at a Trial Term in favor of defendant. Plaintiff sustained serious personal injuries when the motorcycle he was operating struck the left front wheel well of defendant’s automobile as the latter vehicle emerged from a private driveway onto the public highway. The accident occurred on July 2, 1971 at 10:30 P.M., the road was dry and the weather clear. Testimony concerning the happening of the accident was in sharp dispute. The jury chose to accept that version offered by defendant, and there is ample evidence in the record to support a finding that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent. Plaintiff also argues that error was committed in permitting two part-time police officers to testify as to their opinion of the speed of the motorcycle prior to the accident. Such testimony was neither remote nor improper. The record is clear that their testimony was offered not as expert testimony, but as lay opinion, and thus perfectly acceptable (People v. Olsen, 22 N Y 2d 230). The court’s charge to the jury was clear and complete in all phases, and there were no exceptions to it. Judgment affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Staley, Jr., Cooke, Sweeney and Kane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 A.D.2d 631, 353 N.Y.S.2d 577, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5359, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/callaghan-v-giuffre-nyappdiv-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack