Lopez v. Yannotti

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lopez v. Yannotti

24 A.D.2d 758, 263 N.Y.S.2d 523, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3316

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

DecidedOctober 11, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 24 A.D.2d 758 (Lopez v. Yannotti) 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

Lopez v. Yannotti, 24 A.D.2d 758, 263 N.Y.S.2d 523, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3316 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

-—In three consolidated negligence actions to recover for wrongful death and property damage, Marie Yannotti, as defendant in Actions Nos. 1 and 3 and plaintiff in Action No. 2, appeals from so milch [759]*759of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered July 9,1964, after a jury trial, as is against her in all three actions. Judgment reversed, without costs, and new trial granted as to all parties and all issues. We believe it was prejudicial error to receive in evidence that part of Officer Maida’s testimony which “reconstructed” the accident and expressed his opinion that just prior to the collision decedent William Lopez was driving east on Avenue L, and decedent Salvatore Yannotti was driving at 30 to 40 miles per hour, whereas Lopez was not driving very fast. In our opinion, there were insufficient facts in the record to support those opinions, and they were, in effect, mere speculation. Beldock, P. J., TJghetta, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

-—In three consolidated negligence actions to recover for wrongful death and property damage, Marie Yannotti, as defendant in Actions Nos. 1 and 3 and plaintiff in Action No. 2, appeals from so milch [759]*759of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered July 9,1964, after a jury trial, as is against her in all three actions. Judgment reversed, without costs, and new trial granted as to all parties and all issues. We believe it was prejudicial error to receive in evidence that part of Officer Maida’s testimony which “reconstructed” the accident and expressed his opinion that just prior to the collision decedent William Lopez was driving east on Avenue L, and decedent Salvatore Yannotti was driving at 30 to 40 miles per hour, whereas Lopez was not driving very fast. In our opinion, there were insufficient facts in the record to support those opinions, and they were, in effect, mere speculation. Beldock, P. J., TJghetta, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 758, 263 N.Y.S.2d 523, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3316, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lopez-v-yannotti-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack