Stern v. Waldbaum, Inc.
| Decision Date | 23 December 1996 |
| Citation | 234 A.D.2d 534,651 N.Y.S.2d 187 |
| Parties | Peter STERN, et al., Appellants, v. WALDBAUM, INC., etc., Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Schneider, Kleinick, Weitz, Damashek & Shoot, New York City, (Brian J. Shoot and Harry Steinberg, of counsel), for appellants.
Shaub, Ahmuty, Citrin & Spratt, LLP, Lake Success, (Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr., of counsel), for respondent.
Before RITTER, J.P., and PIZZUTO, SANTUCCI and FRIEDMANN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.), entered November 2, 1995, which granted the defendant's trial motion for a judgment as a matter of law and dismissed the complaint.
ORDERED that the order and judgment (one paper) is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is denied, the complaint is reinstated, and a new trial is ordered.
The injured plaintiff slipped and fell on a large spill of liquid soap on the floor of the defendant's supermarket, near Aisle # 1. At the liability trial, the court would not allow the plaintiffs' eyewitness to testify that some 10 to 15 minutes before the fall an announcement was made over the public address system directing an employee to clean up a spill in Aisle # 1. The court reasoned that the statement was inadmissible hearsay. It then dismissed the complaint for the plaintiffs' purported failure to establish that the defendant had notice of the spill. We now reverse and order a new trial.
Hearsay is defined as an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted therein. However, a statement which is not offered to establish the truth of the facts asserted therein is not hearsay (see, Provenzo v. Sam, 23 N.Y.2d 256, 261, 296 N.Y.S.2d 322, 244 N.E.2d 26; Matter of Bergstein v. Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 318, 323-324, 357 N.Y.S.2d 465, 313 N.E.2d 767). It is well established that out-of-court statements by unknown declarants are admissible to establish notice of a dangerous condition, even where the accuracy of the statements is not established (see, e.g., Morrissey v. Riverbay Corp., 222 A.D.2d 234, 635 N.Y.S.2d 11; Splawn v. Lextaj Corp., 197 A.D.2d 479, 603 N.Y.S.2d 41). Where, as here, the truth of the statement is not at issue, it does not matter that the original declarant is unknown and unavailable for cross examination. Anyone who heard an out-of-court...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Benjamin v. El–Ad Props. NY, LLC
...in order to prove the truth of the out-of-court statement and, therefore, his testimony is not hearsay ( see e.g. Stern v. Waldbaum, Inc. 234 A.D.2d 534, 535 [1996] [out-of-court statement directing supermarket employee to clean spill not hearsay]; see also Provenzo v. Sam, 23 N.Y.2d 256, 2......
-
McKnight v. ATA Hous. Corp.
...remaining contention is without merit ( see Quiroa v. Ferenczi, 77 A.D.3d 901, 901–902, 909 N.Y.S.2d 762; Stern v. Waldbaum, Inc., 234 A.D.2d 534, 535, 651 N.Y.S.2d 187). ...
-
People v. Rackett
...v. Lasky, 94 NY2d 231, 701 N.Y.S.2d 689 (1999); Nucci v. Proper, 95 NY2d 597, 721 N.Y.S.2d 593 (2001); Stern v. Waldbaum, Inc., 234 AD2d 534, 651 N.Y.S.2d 187 (2nd Dept. 1996); Winant v. Carras, 208 AD2d 618, 617 N.Y.S.2d 487 (2nd Dept. 1994) lv. den. 85 NY2d 812, 631 N.Y.S.2d 288 (1995); r......
-
Hamilton v. Garlock, Inc.
...See Dartez v. Fibreboard, 765 F.2d 456, 461 (5th Cir.1985); George v. Celotex Corp., 914 F.2d 26 (2d Cir.1990); Stern v. Waldbaum, Inc., 234 A.D.2d 534, 651 N.Y.S.2d 187 (1996). The testimony of Ronsini was properly admitted.1 Atlas Turner raised the of whether this defendant ever sold its ......
-
Hearsay
...Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. Stern v. Waldbaum, Inc ., 234 A.D.2d 534, 651 N.Y.S.2d 187 (2d Dept. 1996). Stated simply, the hearsay rule prohibits introduction into evidence of statements made out of court when offe......
-
Table of cases
...Dept. 1985), §§ 5:170, 15:100 Stern v. Waldbaum, Inc., 109 A.D.2d 789,486 N.Y.S.2d 92 (2d Dept. 1985), § 19:40 Stern v. Waldbaum, Inc., 234 A.D.2d 534, 651 N.Y.S.2d 187 (2d Dept. 1996), §§ 5:10, 5:20 Steuhl v. Home Therapy Equipment, Inc. , 23 A.D.3d 825, 803 N.Y.S.2d 791 (3d Dept. 2005), §......
-
Hearsay
...the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. People v. Patterson , 28 N.Y.3d 544, 68 N.E.3d 1242 (2016); Stern v. Waldbaum, Inc ., 234 A.D.2d 534, 651 N.Y.S.2d 187 (2d Dept. 1996). Stated simply, the hearsay rule prohibits introduction into evidence of statements made out of court whe......
-
Hearsay
...the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. People v. Patterson , 28 N.Y.3d 544, 68 N.E.3d 1242 (2016); Stern v. Waldbaum, Inc. , 234 A.D.2d 534, 651 N.Y.S.2d 187 (2d Dept. 1996). Stated simply, the hearsay rule prohibits introduction into evidence of statements made out of court whe......