Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

MILLER v. KIMBER

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department.
Mar 13, 1992
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court did not err by giving a missing witness charge. A missing witness charge is appropriate when a party fails to call a witness who is within his control and who would be in a position to give substantial, noncumulative testimony (Mashley v Kerr, 47 N.Y.2d 892; Getlin v St. Vincent's Hosp. Med. Center, 117 A.D.2d 707, 709; Chandler v Flynn, 111 A.D.2d 300, appeal dismissed 67 N.Y.2d 647). The fact that portions of the missing witness's records were received into evidence did not render his testimony cumulative (see, Safdie v City of New York, 138 A.D.2d 361, 362). Additionally, the record indicates that the witness's medical opinion differed from the other medical testimony offered at trial.

The x-rays should have been admitted into evidence (see, Stein v Lebowitz-Pine View Hotel, 111 A.D.2d 572, 574, lv denied 65 N.Y.2d 611; CPLR 2306, 4518 [a]). However, the exclusion of the x-rays was harmless error because the x-ray reports, which explained the x-rays, were admitted.

The court's charge on "serious injury" (Insurance Law ยง 5102 [d]) was proper in all respects. Finally, plaintiff failed to preserve for review his contention that a DOT document was improperly excluded from evidence.