Corcoran v. Huntington Lumber & Coal Co.
Opinion
Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. This ease was tried with Smith v. Huntington Lumber & Coal Co. (post, p. 807), decided [804]*804herewith. The action is to recover for damage to an automobile in possession of plaintiff as bailee at the time of the accident. He was trying the car out with the intention of purchasing it, and as matter of fact thereafter paid for the car, which was never returned to the possession of the former owner. The action for damages to the automobile might be maintained by bailor or the bailee. But one action can be maintained, and a recovery by one party is a bar to an action by the other. (First Commercial Bank v. Valentine, 209 N. Y. 145, 150; Green v. Clarke, 12 id. 343, 352; Baird v. Daly, 57 id. 236, 245; Thompson v. Fargo, 49 id. 188, 191.)
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
211 A.D. 803 (Corcoran v. Huntington Lumber & Coal Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.