Case Name: Joseph Loschiavo et al., Appellants, v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Defendant, and National Airlines, Inc., Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1983-03-24
Citations: 58 N.Y.2d 1040
Docket Number: 
Parties: Joseph Loschiavo et al., Appellants, v Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Defendant, and National Airlines, Inc., Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 58
Pages: 1040–1043

Head Matter:
Joseph Loschiavo et al., Appellants, v Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Defendant, and National Airlines, Inc., Respondent.
Argued February 11, 1983;
decided March 24, 1983
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
John Anthony Bonina for appellants.
Thomas E. Mehrtens and John M. Downing for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.
We agree with the majority at the Appellate Division that the trial court, in excluding the testimony offered by plaintiff, properly applied this State's current hearsay rule. Pursuant to this rule, the hearsay statement of an agent is admissible against his employer under the admissions exception to the hearsay rule only if the making of the statement is an activity within the scope of his authority (Kelly v Diesel Constr. Div. of Carl A. Morse, Inc., 35 NY2d 1, 8; Spett v President Monroe Bldg. & Mfg. Corp., 19 NY2d 203, 206). We decline plaintiff's invitation to change this well-settled, albeit widely criticized rule of evidence but note, in this connection, that a proposal for modifica tion of the hearsay rule in this State is now before the Legislature (A Code of Evidence for the State of New York, rule 803, subd [b], par [4] [submitted to the 1982 session of the Legislature]).