From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Rutledge v. Rutledge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 16, 2000
269 A.D.2d 852 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

February 16, 2000

Appeal from Amended Order of Genesee County Family Court, Graney, J. — Order of Protection.

PRESENT: GREEN, A. P. J., HAYES, PIGOTT, JR., AND BALIO, JJ.


Amended order unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum:

By failing to object to petitioner's testimony concerning the contents of various letters, respondent failed to preserve for our review his present contention that the admission of that testimony violated the best evidence rule ( see, CPLR 5501 [a] [3]). Were we to reach the issue, we would conclude that the testimony was properly admitted because petitioner sufficiently explained the unavailability of the primary evidence ( see, Schozer v. William Penn Life Ins. Co. of N. Y., 84 N.Y.2d 639, 643-644).


Summaries of

Matter of Rutledge v. Rutledge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 16, 2000
269 A.D.2d 852 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Rutledge v. Rutledge

Case Details

Full title:MATTER OF TARA R. RUTLEDGE, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, v. EDGAR B. RUTLEDGE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Feb 16, 2000

Citations

269 A.D.2d 852 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
703 N.Y.S.2d 807

Citing Cases

Estate of Essig v. Essig

Defendant appeals from an order and judgment entered after a nonjury trial that, inter alia, awarded…

Estate of Essig v. Essig

Defendant's contention that the evidence proffered by plaintiff at trial to establish the existence of the…