LAW.coLAW.co

In the Matter of Tara R. Rutledge, Respondent, v. Edgar B. Rutledge, Appellant

New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division2000-02-16
269 A.D.2d 852703 N.Y.S.2d 807

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

—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., 84 NY2d 639, 643-644). (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.