Cellamare v. Third Avenue Transit Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cellamare v. Third Avenue Transit Corp.

273 A.D. 260, 77 N.Y.S.2d 91

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

DecidedMarch 1, 1948

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 273 A.D. 260 (Cellamare v. Third Avenue Transit Corp.) 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

Cellamare v. Third Avenue Transit Corp., 273 A.D. 260, 77 N.Y.S.2d 91 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

It was prejudicial error to permit plaintiff’s expert medical witness, who took X-ray pictures of the plaintiff, to testify, over defendant’s objection and exception, to matters shown on the X rays and to findings based thereon, without producing the X-ray pictures and introducing them in evidence (3 Wigmore on Evidence, § 795; Gursslin v. Helenboldt, 259 App. Div. 1064; Marion v. Coon Construction Co., 216 N. Y. 178; O’Mara v. Curtin, 268 App. Div. 888). The judgment, should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Peck, P. J., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ., concur.

Judgment unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Settle order on notice.

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

Per Curiam.

It was prejudicial error to permit plaintiff’s expert medical witness, who took X-ray pictures of the plaintiff, to testify, over defendant’s objection and exception, to matters shown on the X rays and to findings based thereon, without producing the X-ray pictures and introducing them in evidence (3 Wigmore on Evidence, § 795; Gursslin v. Helenboldt, 259 App. Div. 1064; Marion v. Coon Construction Co., 216 N. Y. 178; O’Mara v. Curtin, 268 App. Div. 888). The judgment, should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Peck, P. J., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ., concur.

Judgment unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 A.D. 260, 77 N.Y.S.2d 91, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cellamare-v-third-avenue-transit-corp-nyappdiv-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack