Dillon v. Mundet

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Dillon v. Mundet

145 N.Y.S. 975

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedFebruary 13, 1914

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 145 N.Y.S. 975 (Dillon v. Mundet) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dillon v. Mundet, 145 N.Y.S. 975 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

[1] Upon the facts of this case there can be no doubt that Torrisella, at the time of the collision, was engaged in the business and on behalf of the appellant and acting within the scope of his employment, and that Brown was assisting him therein at Torrisella’s request. The appellant was therefore liable for Brown’s negligence. Althorf v. Wolfe, 22 N. Y. 355; 26 Cyc. 1521.

[2] The plaintiff has recovered as part of his damages the amount [976]*976paid for storage of the automobile from the time of the collision until he exchanged it, and also for the wages paid his chauffeur during the same period. This was erroneous. Together this amounts to $71.57.

The judgment will therefore be reduced to $242.25, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs. All concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

[1] Upon the facts of this case there can be no doubt that Torrisella, at the time of the collision, was engaged in the business and on behalf of the appellant and acting within the scope of his employment, and that Brown was assisting him therein at Torrisella’s request. The appellant was therefore liable for Brown’s negligence. Althorf v. Wolfe, 22 N. Y. 355; 26 Cyc. 1521.

[2] The plaintiff has recovered as part of his damages the amount [976]*976paid for storage of the automobile from the time of the collision until he exchanged it, and also for the wages paid his chauffeur during the same period. This was erroneous. Together this amounts to $71.57.

The judgment will therefore be reduced to $242.25, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

145 N.Y.S. 975, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dillon-v-mundet-nyappterm-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack