Opinion
No. 14–440.
02-20-2015
TRINITY PRESERVATION, L.P., Petitioner–Landlord–Appellant, v. Anthony ROMAN, Respondent–Tenant–Respondent,–and–Christopher Roman, Respondent–Tenant,–and–Sharon Chin, Tony Smalls, “John Doe” and/or “Jane Doe”, Respondents–Undertenants.
Opinion
Appeal from order (Brenda S. Spears, J.), dated August 12, 2013, dismissed, without costs, as nonappealable.
The petitioner-landlord's appeal, ostensibly taken from an order striking certain police testimony elicited at trial as violative of the sealing provisions of CPL 160.50, must be dismissed. An evidentiary ruling, even one made on motion papers, is generally reviewable only in connection with an appeal from a judgment rendered after trial (see Rodriguez v. Ford Motor Co., 17 AD3d 159, 160 [2005] ; Balcom v. Reither, 77 AD3d 863 [2010] ). In any event, were the issue properly before us, we would find no abuse of discretion in the court's evidentiary ruling, since the police witness refreshed her recollection by reviewing documents she should not have possessed (see generally Matter of 53rd St. Rest. Corp. v. New York State Liq. Auth., 220 A.D.2d 588 [1995] ).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
I concur