Bennrona Corp. v. Mulroney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bennrona Corp. v. Mulroney

254 A.D. 630, 3 N.Y.S.2d 87, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6777

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 9, 1938·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Proof of ownership of the plaintiff’s car was sufficient to establish prima facie that the person operating the car was engaged in the owner’s service. (Ferris v. Sterling, 214 N. Y. 249.) We find nothing in the record to rebut this presumption. The contributory negligence of the driver of the car as found by the jury barred a recovery. All concur. (The judgment is for defendant in an automobile negligence action. The order denies a motion for a new trial.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham and Dowling, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Proof of ownership of the plaintiff’s car was sufficient to establish prima facie that the person operating the car was engaged in the owner’s service. (Ferris v. Sterling, 214 N. Y. 249.) We find nothing in the record to rebut this presumption. The contributory negligence of the driver of the car as found by the jury barred a recovery. All concur. (The judgment is for defendant in an automobile negligence action. The order denies a motion for a new trial.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham and Dowling, JJ.

Bennrona Corp. v. Mulroney, 254 A.D. 630, 3 N.Y.S.2d 87, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6777 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

254 A.D. 630 (Bennrona Corp. v. Mulroney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related