Coppola v. Melvin
This text of 241 A.D. 611 (Coppola v. Melvin) 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 reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event. The admission of the police blotter (Defendant’s Exhibit B) in its entirety was [612]*612prejudicial error (Johnson v. Lutz, 253 N. Y. 124); even assuming, without deciding, .that a part of that exhibit was admissible on the theory of a prior inconsistent declaration, the rest of the entries were not admissible. It was likewise error to refuse plaintiff’s request to charge at folio 289. (Code of Ordinances, chap. 24, art. 2, § 11, subd. 9; Police Traffic Regulations, art. 2, § 15; Martin v. Herzog, 228 N. Y. 164, 168.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Scudder 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
241 A.D. 611, 268 N.Y.S. 736, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coppola-v-melvin-nyappdiv-1934.