Hyperlawhypertext legal database Kerr v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co. 57 N.Y.S. 794

← Cases

Kerr v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.

57 N.Y.S. 794 Court N.Y. App. Term Decision date 1899-04-21 English

Delivered by *795 MacLEAN, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 794
(27 Misc. Rep. 190.)
KERR v. METROPOLITAN ST. RY. CO.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
April 21, 1899.)

Headnote

Evidence—Public Records.
In an action against a street-railway company for Injuries to a horse and wagon through a collision with a car, entries on a blotter of the police department, purporting to be the report of a- police officer, respecting the conduct of the motorman at the time of the accident, are not admissible, as such a blotter is not a public record.
Appeal from city court of New York, general term.
Action by John Kerr against the Metropolitan Street-Railway Company. A judgment entered on a verdict in favor of plaintiff was affirmed by the general term of the city court ( 55 N. Y. Supp. 1142 ), and defendant appeals.
Reversed.
Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and MacLEAN, J.
Henry A. Robinson, for appellant.
Foley & Wray, for respondent.

In an action brought to recover damages for injuries to a horse and wagon through collision with a car of the defendant, the plaintiff' was allowed, contrary to the defendant’s objection and exception, to introduce, and have read in evidence, from a blotter of the police department, an extract purporting to be the report of a police officer respecting,- among other things, the conduct of the motorman at the time of the accident. Even were it not proven, as it was by his own testimony, that the officer did not see the occurrence, the reception in evidence of the blotter, wherein the motorman’s conduct was characterized as reckless and causative of the accident, was error prejudicial to the defendant. It was, at best, but a record required for specific purposes, and not a public record,' in such sense as to make its contents evidence of the facts between private parties. The judgment of the general term of the city court should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Judgment reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

FREEDMAN, P. J., concurs.