Key Takeaway
Learn how business records exceptions affect police report admissibility in NY personal injury cases. Expert analysis of Hernandez v Tepan decision for Long Island attorneys.
This article is part of our ongoing business records coverage, with 145 published articles analyzing business records issues across New York State. Attorney Jason Tenenbaum brings 24+ years of hands-on experience to this analysis, drawing from his work on more than 1,000 appeals, over 100,000 no-fault cases, and recovery of over $100 million for clients throughout Nassau County, Suffolk County, Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, and the Bronx. For personalized legal advice about how these principles apply to your specific situation, contact our Long Island office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation.
Understanding Business Records and Police Reports in New York Personal Injury Cases
When pursuing a personal injury claim in New York, evidence is everything. For victims of car accidents, slip and falls, and other incidents throughout Long Island, Queens, Brooklyn, and Manhattan, understanding what evidence can be used in court is crucial to building a successful case. The recent decision in Hernandez v Tepan provides important insights into the admissibility of police reports and the business record exception to hearsay rules.
The Challenge to Police Report Admissibility
Hernandez v Tepan, 2012 NY Slip Op 01211 (2d Dept. 2012)
“As the defendant correctly contends, the police accident report submitted by the plaintiff in support of the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability constituted inadmissible hearsay, since the report was not certified as a business record (see CPLR 4518; Johnson v Lutz, 253 NY 124, 128; Bailey v Reid, 82 AD3d 809, 810; see also Noakes v Rosa, 54 AD3d 317, 318), and there is no indication that some other hearsay exception applied to the statements contained in the report”
This case is a hard read. It says an uncertified police report is hearsay, yet cites to 4518(a) and not 4518(c). The cases that are cited deal with, in essence, Hochauser issues.
The Complexity of Police Report Admissibility in New York
The Hernandez v Tepan decision highlights a persistent challenge in personal injury litigation across New York State. For attorneys and clients dealing with accident cases in Nassau County, Suffolk County, and the five boroughs of NYC, understanding the nuances of police report admissibility can make or break a case.
The court’s reference to CPLR 4518(a) rather than 4518(c) creates some interpretive challenges. CPLR 4518(a) deals with the general business record exception, while 4518(c) specifically addresses public records. This citation pattern suggests the court was focusing on the fundamental requirements for business record authentication rather than the specific rules for police reports.
Understanding the Business Record Exception
In New York personal injury law, the business record exception to hearsay (CPLR 4518) allows certain documents to be admitted as evidence even though they contain out-of-court statements. For a document to qualify as a business record, it must meet specific criteria:
- Regular Course of Business: The record must be made in the ordinary course of business
- Contemporaneous Recording: The information must be recorded at or near the time of the event
- Personal Knowledge: The person recording must have personal knowledge or received information from someone with knowledge
- Proper Certification: The record must be properly certified or authenticated
The Johnson v. Lutz Doctrine and Its Impact
The Hernandez court’s citation to Johnson v Lutz is significant for personal injury practitioners throughout Long Island and New York City. This landmark case established that police accident reports containing statements from witnesses or parties not under a business duty to report accurately cannot be admitted as business records.
Key Principles from Johnson v. Lutz:
- Source Matters: Information in police reports from parties without a duty to report accurately is problematic
- Hearsay Within Hearsay: Police reports often contain multiple levels of hearsay statements
- Authentication Requirements: Proper certification is essential for admissibility
- Alternative Exceptions: Other hearsay exceptions may apply in specific circumstances
Practical Implications for Personal Injury Cases
For clients seeking representation after accidents in Hempstead, Garden City, Brooklyn Heights, or anywhere across the New York metro area, the Hernandez decision underscores several important points:
Police Reports Are Not Automatically Admissible: Many clients assume that police reports are automatically accepted as evidence. However, without proper certification and meeting business record requirements, these crucial documents may be excluded.
Early Case Preparation is Essential: Experienced personal injury attorneys must identify evidence issues early and develop strategies to authenticate police reports or find alternative means of proving liability.
Alternative Evidence Sources: When police reports face admissibility challenges, attorneys must rely on other evidence such as:
- Direct witness testimony
- Expert accident reconstruction
- Physical evidence from the scene
- Surveillance video
- Medical records documenting injuries
Hochauser Issues and Their Relevance
The reference to “Hochauser issues” in the original commentary points to Hochauser v. New York City Transit Authority, a significant case dealing with the admissibility of business records in personal injury actions. This connection suggests that the court in Hernandez was grappling with fundamental questions about what constitutes a proper business record.
Understanding Hochauser Principles:
The Hochauser doctrine affects how attorneys handle documentary evidence in personal injury cases throughout New York:
- Reliability Standards: Business records must meet strict reliability requirements
- Foundation Requirements: Proper foundation must be laid for documentary evidence
- Chain of Custody: Clear chain of custody must be established
- Witness Availability: Consider whether live witness testimony is necessary
Strategic Considerations for Personal Injury Practice
For personal injury victims and their attorneys operating in the complex New York legal landscape, the Hernandez decision offers several strategic lessons:
Early Evidence Preservation
Don’t rely solely on police reports. Immediately after an accident, preserve all available evidence including:
- Photographs of the accident scene
- Contact information for witnesses
- Medical documentation
- Vehicle damage assessments
- Insurance carrier notifications
Expert Witness Preparation
When police reports face admissibility challenges, expert witnesses become even more crucial. This includes:
- Accident reconstruction specialists
- Medical experts for injury causation
- Economic experts for damage calculations
- Vocational experts for lost earning capacity
Alternative Legal Theories
Experienced attorneys develop multiple theories of liability to protect against evidence challenges:
- Negligence per se violations
- Res ipsa loquitur applications
- Product liability claims
- Premises liability theories
Protecting Your Rights After an Accident
If you’ve been injured in a car accident, slip and fall, or other incident anywhere in New York – from Montauk to Manhattan, from the Bronx to Buffalo – understanding your rights regarding evidence is crucial to your case’s success.
Why Experience Matters in Evidence Handling
The Hernandez v Tepan decision demonstrates why choosing an experienced personal injury attorney is so important. The Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum understands the complexities of New York evidence law and knows how to navigate challenges to police report admissibility.
Our comprehensive approach includes:
- Immediate Evidence Preservation: We act quickly to secure and preserve all available evidence
- Expert Witness Networks: Access to qualified experts in accident reconstruction, medical causation, and damages
- Alternative Evidence Development: When police reports face challenges, we develop alternative proof strategies
- Procedural Expertise: Understanding of CPLR requirements and New York case law
Frequently Asked Questions About Police Reports and Evidence
Can a police report be used as evidence in my personal injury case?
Police reports can potentially be admitted as evidence, but they must meet specific legal requirements. The report must be properly certified as a business record, and the information contained must fall within recognized hearsay exceptions. An experienced attorney can evaluate whether your police report will be admissible and develop alternative evidence strategies if needed.
What happens if the police report in my case contains errors?
Police reports can contain inaccuracies, and these errors can impact your case. However, experienced attorneys can challenge incorrect information and present alternative evidence to establish the true facts of your accident. This is why it’s crucial to preserve independent evidence and witness statements.
How long do I have to file a personal injury claim in New York?
New York’s statute of limitations for personal injury claims is generally three years from the date of the accident. However, there are exceptions for certain types of cases and defendants. It’s important to consult with an attorney as soon as possible to protect your rights and ensure all evidence is properly preserved.
What types of evidence are most important in a personal injury case?
Critical evidence includes medical records documenting your injuries, witness statements, photographs of the accident scene and your injuries, expert testimony, and any available surveillance video. The specific evidence needed depends on the circumstances of your case and the legal theories being pursued.
Do I need an expert witness for my personal injury case?
Expert witnesses are often essential in personal injury cases, particularly when police reports face admissibility challenges. Experts can provide accident reconstruction, medical causation opinions, and damage calculations. An experienced attorney will know when expert testimony is necessary and can connect you with qualified professionals.
Get the Legal Representation You Need
Don’t let evidentiary challenges derail your personal injury case. The Hernandez v Tepan decision shows how complex evidence issues can arise, but with experienced legal representation, these challenges can be overcome.
If you’ve been injured in an accident anywhere in the New York area – whether in Nassau County, Suffolk County, Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, or beyond – the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum is ready to fight for your rights.
We understand the intricacies of New York evidence law and know how to build strong cases even when traditional evidence faces challenges. From the moment you contact us, we’ll work to preserve crucial evidence and develop the strongest possible case for your recovery.
Contact the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum today at 516-750-0595 for your free consultation. Time is critical in preserving evidence and protecting your rights – don’t wait to get the experienced legal help you deserve.
Serving injured clients throughout Long Island, New York City, and all of New York State with dedicated personal injury representation focused on achieving the best possible outcomes for every case.
Related Articles
- Court guidance on the business records exception
- Business records electronic data entry requirements
- CPLR 4518(a) business records admissibility rules
- Business records rule restoration in NY personal injury law
- New York No-Fault Insurance Law
Legal Update (February 2026): Since this post’s publication in 2012, New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) Section 4518 governing business records has undergone potential amendments, and appellate courts have issued additional decisions that may have refined the standards for admitting police reports and other business records in personal injury cases. Practitioners should verify current CPLR 4518 provisions and recent case law developments regarding business record certification requirements and hearsay exceptions before relying on the legal framework discussed in this post.
Legal Context
Why This Matters for Your Case
New York law is among the most complex and nuanced in the country, with distinct procedural rules, substantive doctrines, and court systems that differ significantly from other jurisdictions. The Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) governs every stage of civil litigation, from service of process through trial and appeal. The Appellate Division, Appellate Term, and Court of Appeals create a rich and ever-evolving body of case law that practitioners must follow.
Attorney Jason Tenenbaum has practiced across these areas for over 24 years, writing more than 1,000 appellate briefs and publishing over 2,353 legal articles that attorneys and clients rely on for guidance. The analysis in this article reflects real courtroom experience — from motion practice in Civil Court and Supreme Court to oral arguments before the Appellate Division — and a deep understanding of how New York courts actually apply the law in practice.
About This Topic
Business Records & Documentary Evidence in New York
The business records exception to the hearsay rule is one of the most important evidentiary foundations in New York litigation. Establishing that a document qualifies as a business record under CPLR 4518 requires showing it was made in the regular course of business, at or near the time of the event, and that it was the regular practice to create such records. In no-fault and personal injury cases, disputes over business records arise constantly — from claim files and medical records to billing documents and mailing logs.
145 published articles in Business records
Keep Reading
More Business records Analysis
CPLR § 2106 Amendment Eliminates Affidavit Notarization Requirement: What This Means for New York Litigation
NY CPLR 2106 amendment eliminates notarized affidavits and certificates of conformity. Learn how this changes litigation practice. Call 516-750-0595.
Feb 18, 2026
4518(a)
Analysis of double hearsay issues in motor vehicle accident cases, examining inadmissible police reports and the business records exception under New York evidence law.
Sep 25, 2020
The Future is Bright for Medical Necessity Summary Judgment Motions in New York
New York medical necessity summary judgment motions are evolving with stricter expert testimony standards, creating opportunities for skilled no-fault insurance attorneys.
Dec 28, 2008
The Arbitrator Charles Sloane 2106 rule: deemed arbitrary.
First Department rules that no-fault arbitrators cannot strictly enforce CPLR 2106 evidentiary requirements, calling such rigid adherence "arbitrary" in landmark decision.
Mar 19, 2015
Another really intelligent appeal
Court of Appeals decision on no-fault insurance claims showing plaintiff's burden of proof and proper use of denial forms as evidence in New York cases.
Aug 18, 2011
Expert evidence necessary to address malpractice claim
Medical malpractice claims require expert evidence to establish departure from standard of care and causation. McKenzie v Abrahams case highlights need for comprehensive expert...
Apr 21, 2010Was this article helpful?
About the Author
Jason Tenenbaum, Esq.
Jason Tenenbaum is the founding attorney of the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C., headquartered at 326 Walt Whitman Road, Suite C, Huntington Station, New York 11746. With over 24 years of experience since founding the firm in 2002, Jason has written more than 1,000 appeals, handled over 100,000 no-fault insurance cases, and recovered over $100 million for clients across Long Island, Nassau County, Suffolk County, Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, the Bronx, and Staten Island. He is one of the few attorneys in the state who both writes his own appellate briefs and tries his own cases.
Jason is admitted to practice in New York, New Jersey, Florida, Texas, Georgia, and Michigan state courts, as well as multiple federal courts. His 2,353+ published legal articles analyzing New York case law, procedural developments, and litigation strategy make him one of the most prolific legal commentators in the state. He earned his Juris Doctor from Syracuse University College of Law.
Disclaimer: This article is published by the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this content. The legal principles discussed may not apply to your specific situation, and the law may have changed since this article was last updated.
New York law varies by jurisdiction — court decisions in one Appellate Division department may not be followed in another, and local court rules in Nassau County Supreme Court differ from those in Suffolk County Supreme Court, Kings County Civil Court, or Queens County Supreme Court. The Appellate Division, Second Department (which covers Long Island, Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island) and the Appellate Term (which hears appeals from lower courts) each have distinct procedural requirements and precedents that affect litigation strategy.
If you need legal help with a business records matter, contact our office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation. We serve clients throughout Long Island (Huntington, Babylon, Islip, Brookhaven, Smithtown, Riverhead, Southampton, East Hampton), Nassau County (Hempstead, Garden City, Mineola, Great Neck, Manhasset, Freeport, Long Beach, Rockville Centre, Valley Stream, Westbury, Hicksville, Massapequa), Suffolk County (Hauppauge, Deer Park, Bay Shore, Central Islip, Patchogue, Brentwood), Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, the Bronx, Staten Island, and Westchester County. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
