Corcoran v. Huntington Lumber & Coal Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Corcoran v. Huntington Lumber & Coal Co.

211 A.D. 803

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 15, 1924

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 211 A.D. 803 (Corcoran v. Huntington Lumber & Coal Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Corcoran v. Huntington Lumber & Coal Co., 211 A.D. 803 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

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.)

Present — Kelly, P. J., Rich, Manning, Kelby and Kapper, JJ.

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

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.)

Present — Kelly, P. J., Rich, Manning, Kelby and Kapper, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 A.D. 803, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corcoran-v-huntington-lumber-coal-co-nyappdiv-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack