Cortis v. Grenor Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cortis v. Grenor Co.

20 A.D.2d 704, 247 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4302

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 1964

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 20 A.D.2d 704 (Cortis v. Grenor Co.) 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

Cortis v. Grenor Co., 20 A.D.2d 704, 247 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4302 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment for defendant on the merits awarding costs after jury trial, entered July 3, 1962, unanimously reversed on the law, the jury verdict vacated, and a new trial ordered, with costs to plaintiff-appellant. In this action for personal injuries inflicted by defendant’s employee, defendant’s attorney read into the record many pages of affidavits from a previous matrimonial action. The material contained vivid details of an unsavory matrimonial life and an extortion plot. The record clearly shows, except as to some insubstantial items, the purpose was only to attack plaintiff’s credibility. Extrinsic evidence may not be introduced on this collateral issue (Potter v. Browne, 197 N. Y. 288, 293; Richardson, Evidence [8th ed.], § 503). Also, the defense cross-examination on the same subjects was much too long, extending beyond discretionary limits (cf. Richardson, Evidence, § 502). Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Steuer and Bastow, JJ.

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

Judgment for defendant on the merits awarding costs after jury trial, entered July 3, 1962, unanimously reversed on the law, the jury verdict vacated, and a new trial ordered, with costs to plaintiff-appellant. In this action for personal injuries inflicted by defendant’s employee, defendant’s attorney read into the record many pages of affidavits from a previous matrimonial action. The material contained vivid details of an unsavory matrimonial life and an extortion plot. The record clearly shows, except as to some insubstantial items, the purpose was only to attack plaintiff’s credibility. Extrinsic evidence may not be introduced on this collateral issue (Potter v. Browne, 197 N. Y. 288, 293; Richardson, Evidence [8th ed.], § 503). Also, the defense cross-examination on the same subjects was much too long, extending beyond discretionary limits (cf. Richardson, Evidence, § 502). Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Steuer and Bastow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 704, 247 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4302, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cortis-v-grenor-co-nyappdiv-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack