Majors v. Mirsky
This text of 272 A.D.2d 764 (Majors v. Mirsky) 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
Order appealed from, which grants a new trial on the judge’s minutes under section 649 of the Civil Practice Act, unanimously affirmed, with costs and disbursements. On the retrial, plaintiff’s evidence that the light was not burning at 6:00 P.m. and defendant’s evidence that it was burning at 6:30 P.M. should both be excluded. The accident happened at 4:00 p.m. This .evidence concerns a physical fact too easily susceptible of alteration after the accident to have probative force of the condition at the time of the accident. Present — Martin, P. J., Cohn, Callahan, Peck and Van Voorhis, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
272 A.D.2d 764, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/majors-v-mirsky-nyappdiv-1947.