FERNANDEZ v. HIGDON ELEVATOR COMPANY

It is well settled that evidence concerning post-accident repairs is generally inadmissible absent certain exceptions and is never admissible as proof of admission of negligence ( Kaplan v. Einy, 209 A.D.2d 248, 252). The only exceptions to the general rule arise (1) when there is an issue of control or (2) when plaintiff has alleged a defect in manufacture ( Scudero v Campbell, 288 N.Y. 328). Neither exception is applicable here.

Accordingly, it was error to require defendant to produce the records in question.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Kupferman, Ross and Tom, JJ.