Hahn v. City of Niagara Falls

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hahn v. City of Niagara Falls

143 A.D.2d 517, 533 N.Y.S.2d 37, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10650

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

DecidedSeptember 27, 1988

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 143 A.D.2d 517 (Hahn v. City of Niagara Falls) 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

Hahn v. City of Niagara Falls, 143 A.D.2d 517, 533 N.Y.S.2d 37, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10650 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Although the court erroneously received into evidence the unsigned transcript of the examination before trial of witness Klein (Nicholas v Island Indus. Park, 46 AD2d 804), that error was harmless. The court, in rendering its verdict in the nonjury trial, expressly found that, even disregarding the testimony of witness Klein, negligence was established.

Also harmless was the error in admitting the uncertified and unauthenticated hospital and medical bills. Even if the [518]*518bills themselves had not been admitted, that evidence and the testimony of plaintiff and her physician established the reasonable value of the medical services for which plaintiff was responsible.

Finally, we find no reason to disturb the court’s apportionment of the liability between defendants. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Mintz, J. — negligence.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Lawton, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Although the court erroneously received into evidence the unsigned transcript of the examination before trial of witness Klein (Nicholas v Island Indus. Park, 46 AD2d 804), that error was harmless. The court, in rendering its verdict in the nonjury trial, expressly found that, even disregarding the testimony of witness Klein, negligence was established.

Also harmless was the error in admitting the uncertified and unauthenticated hospital and medical bills. Even if the [518]*518bills themselves had not been admitted, that evidence and the testimony of plaintiff and her physician established the reasonable value of the medical services for which plaintiff was responsible.

Finally, we find no reason to disturb the court’s apportionment of the liability between defendants. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Mintz, J. — negligence.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 A.D.2d 517, 533 N.Y.S.2d 37, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10650, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hahn-v-city-of-niagara-falls-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack