Legal Opinion
Schozer v. William Penn Life Insurance
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 6, 1994PublishedCited by 145 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Titone, J.
In this action to recover life insurance proceeds, we are called upon to determine whether the trial court properly barred the admission of an X-ray report, recorded by a physician as part of the underwriting process, and expert medical testimony concerning the physician’s impression of the X ray, where the underlying X-ray film was unavailable at trial. Because the courts below improperly concluded that the best evidence rule establishes an absolute bar to the admission of that secondary evidence, without permitting defendant to establish any excuse for its…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Hambsch v. New York City Transit AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Edwards v. . NoyesNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- People v. . DolanNew York Court of Appeals · 1906
- Marion v. B. G. Coon Construction Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1915
- American Nat. Ins. Co. v. PointsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by145 opinions
- Wagman v. BradshawAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- People v. JosephNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- People v. HortonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
- Lanpont v. Savvas Cab Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- People v. PhamAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
140 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.