Martin v. Lewis

12 A.D.2d 750, 210 N.Y.S.2d 1, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13050
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 24, 1961
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 12 A.D.2d 750 (Martin v. Lewis) 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
Martin v. Lewis, 12 A.D.2d 750, 210 N.Y.S.2d 1, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13050 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Opinion

Judgment in favor of plaintiff-respondent in the sum of $5,220 in an action for personal injuries, reversed, on the law, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, [751]*751and a new trial ordered, with costs to defendant-appellant. Plaintiff-respondent’s assigned reasons for calling as a witness defendant-appellant’s trial counsel are specious. Where, as here, prejudicial testimony is clearly inadmissible, objections to the questions should have been sustained. The subsequent striking of the testimony did not eliminate possible prejudice, which should always be guarded against and here was unnecessarily introduced. Concur — Valente, J. P., McNally and Eager, JJ.; Stevens and Bergan, JJ., dissent and vote to affirm in the following memorandum by Stevens, J.: The trial here was for assessment of damages, summary judgment having been granted by a prior order entered May 25, 1960. There is no prohibition against the calling as a witness by an attorney of his adversary’s counsel. I agree that the questions asked are irrelevant and immaterial and objections thereto should have been sustained. However, in the view I take, there is no showing by defendant of prejudice resulting therefrom. The court may take judicial notice that under chapter 655 of the Laws of 1956 former section 93-b of the Vehicle and Traffic Law (now § 312) required that commencing January 1, 1957 all vehicles have insurance. The accident claimed in the instant case allegedly occurred on May 3, 1957, and even if defendant’s contention is correct (which plaintiff disputes) it is difficult to see how he was prejudiced thereby.

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

Related

Santana v. Oneida Motor Freight, Inc.
91 A.D.2d 627 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 A.D.2d 750, 210 N.Y.S.2d 1, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13050, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-lewis-nyappdiv-1961.