Scheer v. Murphy

New York Court of Appeals

Scheer v. Murphy

312 N.E.2d 477, 34 N.Y.2d 683, 356 N.Y.S.2d 294, 1974 N.Y. LEXIS 1647

DecidedMay 1, 1974

StatusPublished

This text of 312 N.E.2d 477 (Scheer v. Murphy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Scheer v. Murphy, 312 N.E.2d 477, 34 N.Y.2d 683, 356 N.Y.S.2d 294, 1974 N.Y. LEXIS 1647 (N.Y. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: On the whole record, including the report of the trial commissioner, the Police Commissioner was entitled to credit the testimony of the witnesses despite the fact that the department had not preserved the wire recording of the possibly inconsistent statement on November 26, 1962 of the witness Grant.

Concur: Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Rabin. Taking no part: Judge Stevens.

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

Judgment affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: On the whole record, including the report of the trial commissioner, the Police Commissioner was entitled to credit the testimony of the witnesses despite the fact that the department had not preserved the wire recording of the possibly inconsistent statement on November 26, 1962 of the witness Grant.

Concur: Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Rabin. Taking no part: Judge Stevens.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

312 N.E.2d 477, 34 N.Y.2d 683, 356 N.Y.S.2d 294, 1974 N.Y. LEXIS 1647, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scheer-v-murphy-ny-1974.