You are here: / / Defendant Properly Precluded from Introducing Medical Records Without Accompanying...
,

Defendant Properly Precluded from Introducing Medical Records Without Accompanying Medical Testimony

The Third Department determined defendant was properly precluded from placing his hospital records into evidence in the absence of any accompanying medical testimony.  The defendant in this DWI case wanted to use the hospital records to demonstrate his failure of the sobriety tests was due to his medical condition, not intoxication.  The trial court correctly ruled that, without accompanying medical testimony, the jury would have to speculate about the meaning of the hospital records:

In support of his theory that his failure of the field sobriety tests was caused by his medical ailments as opposed to intoxication, defendant sought the admission of his hospital records — unaccompanied by any testimony from a medical professional. County Court denied the relief, concluding that defendant’s hospital records, while generally admissible pursuant to CPLR 4518, would lead the jury to speculate as to defendant’s medical condition unless a medical professional offered an explanation. The court did permit defendant to testify regarding his physical condition and hospital treatment, and to introduce photographs of his injuries at trial … . Inasmuch as the hospital records, without explanatory testimony, would have required the jury to speculate as to whether defendant’s injuries caused him to fail the sobriety tests, we find that the court properly excluded them … . People v Collins, 2015 NY Slip Op 105558, 3rd Dept 3-12-15

 

You might also like
No Need to Be Affiliated with an Authorized Rescue Entity or Volunteer Agency to Qualify for Benefits from World Trade Center Volunteer Fund
EDUCATION LAW STATUTE REQUIRING A 60% MAJORITY TO AUTHORIZE A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE OVER THE STATUTORY CAP (TO FUND SCHOOL DISTRICTS) IS CONSTITUTIONAL.
Town Could Not Be Liable for Discretionary Judgment Made by EMT (Third Dept).
Plaintiff Did Not Affirmatively Demonstrate Fire Was Not Intentionally Set by Merely Challenging the Insurer’s Arson Investigation—Plaintiff’s Summary Judgment Motion Properly Denied—Proof Burdens at Summary Judgment Stage Explained
PETITIONER’S EMPIRE ZONE CERTIFICATION PROPERLY REVOKED.
FAMILY COURT SHOULD NOT HAVE DELEGATED ITS AUTHORITY TO SET UP A VISITATION SCHEDULE TO THE CHILD AND MOTHER (THIRD DEPT).
Plaintiff Properly Relied on the Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur to Survive Summary Judgment
Restrictive Covenants in Homeowners’ Association’s Declaration Do Not Apply to Land Along a Road Which Had Been Dedicated by the Association to the Town

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

Presentation of Hearsay to Grand Jury Did Not Taint the Proceedings—Criteria... Criteria for Balancing the Need for a Public Trial and First Amendment Rights...