Tepper v.Tannenbaum
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Murphy, P. J.
The facts underlying this action have been thoroughly set forth in the opinion of the trial court (87 Misc 2d 829) and they will not be repeated in this opinion. No dispute is presented on appeal as to Daniel’s right to read into evidence Sam’s examination before trial (Foro v Doetsch, 39 AD2d 150, affd 33 NY2d 767; Ward v Kovacs, 55 AD2d 391, 400, 401). However, issues are raised as to (1) Daniel’s right to testify concerning his "personal transactions” and "communications” with Sam concerning the alleged maintenance contracts, and (2) Daniel’s right to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- S. W. Scott & Co. v. ScottAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
- Rogers v. . DeckerNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Ward v. KovacsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1977
- Tepper v. TannenbaumNew York Supreme Court · 1976
- Foro v. DoetschAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Axa Marine And Aviation Insurance (Uk) Limited v. Seajet Industries Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
- Miller v. Lu-WhitneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Chang v. BotsacosAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Knoll North America, Inc. v. IBF Group, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1993
- DeVito v. New York University College of DentistryNew York Supreme Court · 1989
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.