Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Renauld Davis, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Estelle Vallie

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department


March 16, 2012

RENAULD DAVIS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
ESTELLE VALLIE, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Timothy J. Walker, A.J.), entered December 21, 2010 in a personal injury action.

Davis v Vallie

Appellate Division, Fourth Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on March 16, 2012

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

The judgment dismissed the complaint upon a jury verdict.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries he allegedly sustained on property owned by defendant. According to plaintiff, he was injured as a result of defendant's negligent failure to maintain and service a defective storm glass window. Plaintiff contends that Supreme Court erred in admitting in evidence a Rental Assistance Corporation Inspection Report (hereafter, Inspection Report) and the lease agreement between defendant and the tenant of the property in question. Plaintiff objected to the admission in evidence of the Inspection Report only on the ground that it was not authenticated pursuant to CPLR 4518 and therefore constituted hearsay. He failed to object to that report on any of the grounds raised on appeal or to object to the admission in evidence of the lease agreement, and thus his contention is not preserved for our review (see Ames v Shute, 90 AD3d 1629, 1630; Ciesinski v Town of Aurora, 202 AD2d 984, 985; see generally CPLR 5501 [a] [3]). Even assuming, arguendo, that the court erred in admitting the Inspection Report in evidence, we conclude that the error is harmless (see generally Rizzuto v Getty Petroleum Corp., 289 AD2d 217, 217-218).

Entered: March 16, 2012

Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court

20120316

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.