New York Court of Appeals, 1969

Barbagallo v. Americana Corp.

New York Court of Appeals · Decided November 26, 1969

25 N.Y.2d 655; 254 N.E.2d 768; 306 N.Y.S.2d 466; 1969 N.Y. LEXIS 968

Cases that cite this one

9 later published cases cite this decision.

Cheeks v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
Disalvo v. Bortle (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1977)
Platovsky v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2000)
Coleman v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
Badr v. Hogan (N.Y. 1990)
Doreen J. v. Thomas John F. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
Liberto v. Worcester Mutual Insurance (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)
Khan v. Khan (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1976)
In re Brian W. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1975)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Memorandum. The exclusion of the telephone conversations was error because they were relevant to establishing the duration and depth of defendant’s alleged fear. The truth of their contents was not the purpose of defendant’s offer. (Ferrara v. Galluchio, 5 N Y 2d 16, 19-20; Eichardson, Evidence [9th ed.], § 211.) It cannot be concluded that, as a matter of law, the jury would not have been influenced by the additional details in assessing defendant’s alleged fear of injury to himself or his family. The request as to the effect of the failure of plaintiff’s wife to testify was improper inform and, therefore, was properly denied (Seligson, Morris & Neuburger v. Fairbanks Whitney Cory., 22 A D 2d 625, 629-631).

Judges Burke, Bergan, Breitel, Jasen and Gibson concur in memorandum; Chief Judge Fuld and Judge Scileppi dissent in part and vote to affirm as to both defendants on the opinion at the Appellate Division.

*657Order modified to the extent of reversing the judgment in favor of plaintiff against defendant Thierer and directing a new trial, with costs to abide the event, and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs to defendant Americana Corp., in a memorandum..

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.