Yassin v. Blackman
Decision Date | 23 September 2020 |
Docket Number | 524399/17,2019–04138,Index No. 524399/17 |
Citation | 131 N.Y.S.3d 53,188 A.D.3d 62 |
Parties | Jehad YASSIN, respondent, v. Lyndon BLACKMAN, et al., appellants. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
James J. Toomey, New York, N.Y. (Jason Meneses of counsel), for appellants.
Chopra & Nocerino, LLP (Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, LLP, New York, N.Y. [Brian J. Isaac and Jillian Rosen ], of counsel), for respondent.
LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P., ROBERT J. MILLER, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.
An uncertified police accident report does not constitute admissible evidence, absent a proper foundation for its admissibility (see Memenza v. Cole, 131 A.D.3d 1020, 1021, 16 N.Y.S.3d 287 ). We take this opportunity to clarify a line of cases from this Court that held that a party's admission, contained in an uncertified police report, was admissible. For the reasons that follow, those cases should no longer be followed. Further, the order of the Supreme Court granting the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability should be reversed.
The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for personal injuries he allegedly sustained when a taxi he was operating came into contact with a truck operated by the defendant Lyndon Blackman and owned by the defendant Hylan Datacom.
The plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability, submitting, inter alia, his own affidavit and a copy of an uncertified police accident report. In his affidavit, the plaintiff averred that the vehicle he was operating "had come to a stop ... at a traffic light for approximately 4–5 seconds before it was rear-ended by [the defendants'] vehicle," which had "attempted to go around me on the left and smashed into the rear portion of my vehicle." The plaintiff averred:
The uncertified police accident report included, inter alia, a statement attributed to the operator of the defendants' vehicle that "HE WAS ATTEMPTING TO PASS [the plaintiff's vehicle] TO CONTINUE STRAIGHT ON WEST 48TH STREET SIDE SWIPING [the plaintiff's vehicle]."
In opposition, the defendants submitted an affidavit by Blackman, who averred, in pertinent part:
The Supreme Court granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The defendants appeal.
On appeal, the defendants contend that Blackman's affidavit was sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact on the issue of liability, and specifically, on the issue of whether the plaintiff's vehicle suddenly moved in front of Blackman's vehicle just before the moment of impact. The plaintiff responds, inter alia, that Blackman's affidavit should be disregarded as a feigned attempt to avoid the consequences of his admission contained in the police accident report. In reply, the defendants argue that the police accident report is inadmissible, as it was not certified. The defendants also argue that Blackman's purported statement to the police officer at the scene of the accident and the averments in his affidavit are not inconsistent.
As an initial matter, we take this opportunity to clarify our case law regarding the admissibility of a party's statement recorded in an uncertified police report. We hold that, absent a proper foundation, a party's admission contained in an uncertified police accident report is inadmissible.
The use of a statement recorded in a police accident report involves two levels of hearsay, each of which must fit within a hearsay exception to render the statement contained within the report admissible (see Memenza v. Cole, 131 A.D.3d at 1022, 16 N.Y.S.3d 287, citing Murray v. Donlan, 77 A.D.2d 337, 346, 433 N.Y.S.2d 184 ).
At the first level of hearsay, the report itself must be admissible. A properly certified police accident report is admissible where "the report is made based upon the officer's personal observations and while carrying out police duties" ( Memenza v. Cole, 131 A.D.3d at 1021, 16 N.Y.S.3d 287 ). CPLR 4518(c) provides that the foundation for the admissibility of, inter alia, the records of a department or bureau of a municipal corporation or of the state may be laid through a proper certification (see CPLR 2306 ; Vincent C. Alexander, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, CPLR C4518:10 [ ] ). CPLR 4518(c) "is governed by the same standards as the general business record exception" ( People v. Mertz, 68 N.Y.2d 136, 147, 506 N.Y.S.2d 290, 497 N.E.2d 657 ). Thus, the certification must "set forth" ( id. at 148, 506 N.Y.S.2d 290, 497 N.E.2d 657 ) that the record "was made in the regular course of any business and that it was the regular course of such business to make it, at the time of the act, transaction, occurrence or event, or within a reasonable time thereafter" ( CPLR 4518[a] ).
At the second level of hearsay, assuming a properly certified police accident report, the statement recorded within the police accident report by the police officer must satisfy a hearsay exception. This Court has held that, even where a police report is properly certified, the hearsay statements of nonparties or unknown sources contained therein may not be admitted for their truth (see Noakes v. Rosa, 54 A.D.3d 317, 318, 862 N.Y.S.2d 573 [ ; DeLuca v. Blanco, 31 A.D.3d 600, 601, 819 N.Y.S.2d 86 [] ; see also Shehab v. Powers, 150 A.D.3d 918, 919, 54 N.Y.S.3d 104 []; Memenza v. Cole, 131 A.D.3d at 1022, 16 N.Y.S.3d 287 [] ). Where, as here, the police report has not been certified, and a foundation for its admissibility has not been laid by some other method, the report and its contents constitute inadmissible hearsay (see Johnson v. Lutz, 253 N.Y. 124, 128, 170 N.E. 517 ).
Although a line of cases from our Court held that an uncertified police report constitutes inadmissible hearsay (see Pavane v. Marte, 109 A.D.3d 970, 971, 971 N.Y.S.2d 562 ; Rodriguez v. Ryder Truck, Inc., 91 A.D.3d 935, 936, 937 N.Y.S.2d 602 ; Matter of Peerless Ins. Co. v. Milloul, 140 A.D.2d 346, 347–348, 527 N.Y.S.2d 838 ; O'Connor v. Incorporated Vil. of Port Jefferson, 104 A.D.2d 861, 862, 480 N.Y.S.2d 376 ), a separate line of cases anomalously espoused a carve-out to that rule, holding that a party's admission in an uncertified police report is admissible against that party. Although a party's admission is an exception to the hearsay rule (see Reed v. McCord, 160 N.Y. 330, 341, 54 N.E. 737 [] ), it is not logically consistent to hold that such admission may be received into evidence where the business record containing the purported admission is not itself in admissible form. Stated differently, a party's admission contained within a police accident report may not be bootstrapped into evidence if a proper foundation for the admissibility of the report itself has not been laid.
Thus, considering the foregoing double-hearsay analysis, in Gezelter v. Pecora , 129 A.D.3d 1021, 1022–1023, 13 N.Y.S.3d 141, it was inconsistent to hold: "With respect to the police accident report submitted by the defendant in support of his motion, it was not certified as a business record and thus constituted...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Berhad v. Park Place Dev. Primary
... ... 106 A.D.3d 622 [1 st Dept 2013]), but cannot ... support Defendants cross-motions for summary judgment ... (see eg Yassin v Blackman, 188 A.D.3d 62 [2d Dept ... 2020]). Entirely unaddressed in the cross-motions is what ... admissible proof supports that any of these ... ...
-
Collymore-Maynard v. Gayle-Lyken
...Report. As an initial matter, the Police Accident is not admissible given that the report is not certified. See Yassin v. Blackman, 188 A.D.3d 62, 64, 131 N.Y.S.3d 53, 55 [2d Dept 2020]. Defendant Abdalla states in his affidavit that "[o]n 9/22/2019,1 was driving livery plate # T618152C. I ......
-
Gold v. Singh
...vehicle #2 [Defendant Singh's Vehicle], and vehicle #4 [the Leifer Defendants' vehicle] hit him from the rear." See Yassin v. Blackman, 188 A.D.3d 62, 64, 131 N.Y.S.3d 53, 55 [2d Dept 2020]. In opposition to the motion, the Plaintiff has not raised a material issue of fact that would preven......
-
Mendel v. Massre
...therefore there is not the proper foundation for the admissibility of the report (see CPLR § 4518(a); see generally Yassin v. Blackman, 188 A.D.3d 62, 131 N.Y.S.3d 53 [2 Dept.,Page 7 2020]). It is unclear from plaintiff's testimony whether he saw defendant's vehicle moving prior to the coll......
-
Hearsay
...statement). A statement otherwise subject to a hearsay exception is inadmissible if contained in a hearsay document. Yassin v. Blackman , 188 A.D.3d 62, 131 N.Y.S.3d 53 (2d Dept. 2020) (a party admission contained in an uncertified police report is inadmissible). An out-of-court statement t......
-
Hearsay
...statement). A statement otherwise subject to a hearsay exception is inadmissible if contained in a hearsay document. Yassin v. Blackman, 188 A.D.3d 62, 131 N.Y.S.3d 53 (2d Dept. 2020) (a party admission contained in an uncertiied police report is inadmissible). An out-of-court statement tha......
-
Evidence
...such evidence if the preparers fail to respond to a subpoena or are otherwise unavailable for examination. NEW YORK Yassin v. Blackman , 188 A.D.3d 62, 131 N.Y.S.3d 53 (2020). Absent a proper foundation, a party’s admission contained in an uncertified police accident report is inadmissible.......