Simonetti v. Melhorn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Simonetti v. Melhorn

9 A.D.2d 768, 192 N.Y.S.2d 505, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6377

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

DecidedNovember 2, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 9 A.D.2d 768 (Simonetti v. Melhorn) 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

Simonetti v. Melhorn, 9 A.D.2d 768, 192 N.Y.S.2d 505, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6377 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, and for medical expenses and loss of services, the appeal is from so much of a judgment entered on a jury verdict as is in favor of respondents against appellants. Judgment insofar as appealed from unanimously affirmed, with costs. Respondent Grace Simonetti was a passenger in appellants’ motor vehicle which collided with the motor vehicle of the defendants Lindner. Respondents called the driver of the Lindner car as a witness. On redirect examination respondents offered in evidence the report to the Motor Vehicle Bureau signed and filed by the witness. Over appellants’ objection that it was self-serving and not contradictory of the testimony of the witness, the report was received in evidence. Its reception was proper in view of the statements therein contained contradictory to the oral testimony given by the witness. (Civ. Prae. Act, § 343-a; Englberger v. Hulse, 261 App. Div. 921, affd. 286 N. V. 653.) Present — Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, and for medical expenses and loss of services, the appeal is from so much of a judgment entered on a jury verdict as is in favor of respondents against appellants. Judgment insofar as appealed from unanimously affirmed, with costs. Respondent Grace Simonetti was a passenger in appellants’ motor vehicle which collided with the motor vehicle of the defendants Lindner. Respondents called the driver of the Lindner car as a witness. On redirect examination respondents offered in evidence the report to the Motor Vehicle Bureau signed and filed by the witness. Over appellants’ objection that it was self-serving and not contradictory of the testimony of the witness, the report was received in evidence. Its reception was proper in view of the statements therein contained contradictory to the oral testimony given by the witness. (Civ. Prae. Act, § 343-a; Englberger v. Hulse, 261 App. Div. 921, affd. 286 N. V. 653.) Present — Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 A.D.2d 768, 192 N.Y.S.2d 505, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simonetti-v-melhorn-nyappdiv-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack