Corcoran v. Huntington Lumber & Coal Co.

211 A.D. 803
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 15, 1924·Published·Cited by 5 cases

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

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

211 A.D. 803 (Corcoran v. Huntington Lumber & Coal Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

GROSSMAN CHEVROLET COMPANY v. Enockson
86 N.W.2d 644 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1957)
Berger v. 34th Street Garage, Inc.
274 A.D. 414 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1948)
Books v. Goldstein
160 Misc. 488 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1936)
Mitchell v. Vande
160 Misc. 63 (New York County Courts, 1936)
Schwartz v. Fletcher
238 A.D. 554 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1933)