From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gursslin v. Helenboldt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 28, 1940
259 App. Div. 1064 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)

Opinion

June 28, 1940.

Present — Crosby, P.J., Cunningham, Taylor, Harris and McCurn, JJ.


Judgment and order reversed on the law and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellants to abide the event. Memorandum: It was prejudicial error to permit plaintiff's expert medical witness to testify over defendants' objection and exception to matters shown by the X-rays without introducing the X-ray pictures in evidence. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action. The order denies a motion for a new trial.)


Summaries of

Gursslin v. Helenboldt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 28, 1940
259 App. Div. 1064 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)
Case details for

Gursslin v. Helenboldt

Case Details

Full title:HERMAN GURSSLIN, Respondent, v. MILDRED HELENBOLDT and CARL HELENBOLDT…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Jun 28, 1940

Citations

259 App. Div. 1064 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)

Citing Cases

Sirico v. Cotto

A "document", within the meaning of the best evidence rule, is any physical embodiment of information or…

Schozer v. Wm. Penn Life Ins. Co.

"With respect to the claimed fracture, plaintiff's physician testified that, based on his reading of an X ray…