Levins v. Bucholtz
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Per curiam
We allowed leave to appeal from the determination of the Appellate Term in this matter out of concern for the impression that may have been drawn from the opinion of the Appellate Term that a judgment of the Small Claims Part of the Municipal Court might rest entirely upon hearsay evidence and be beyond challenge on appeal on the ground that substantial justice had not been done according to the rules and principles of substantive law.
While the hearsay rule is a rule of evidence and the improper admissibility of hearsay evidence may not amount to a substantial injustice warranting a new…
2Cited by19 opinions
- Omara v. PoliseAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1995
- Archie Shepp v. Werner X. Uehlinger Personally and D/B/A Hat Hut Records, and Third Party v. Max Roach, Third PartyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1985
- Arnold Herstand & Co. v. Gallery: Gertrude Stein, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Schiffman v. Deluxe Caterers of Shelter Rock, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Forte v. BieleckiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.