Fisher v. New York Good Humor, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fisher v. New York Good Humor, Inc.

265 A.D. 967, 39 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6775

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

DecidedDecember 30, 1942

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 265 A.D. 967 (Fisher v. New York Good Humor, Inc.) 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

Fisher v. New York Good Humor, Inc., 265 A.D. 967, 39 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6775 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Assuming that a presumption existed in favor of plaintiff that the act of the employee in permitting intestate to ride as a passenger was within the scope of the employment, the uneontradieted proof of the defendant that the employee had been forbidden to carry passengers, supplemented by the written instructions and the paster on the windshield of the truck, operated conclusively to rebut such presumption and required dismissal of the complaint. (Rolfe V. Hewitt, 227 N. Y. 486; Goldberg v. Borden’s Condensed Milk Co., 227 N. Y. 465; Psota v. Long Island R. R. Co., 246 N. Y. 388; Clark v. Harnischfeger Sales Corp., 238 App. Div. 493; Hull v. Littauer, 162 N. Y. 569, 572.) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ.

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

Assuming that a presumption existed in favor of plaintiff that the act of the employee in permitting intestate to ride as a passenger was within the scope of the employment, the uneontradieted proof of the defendant that the employee had been forbidden to carry passengers, supplemented by the written instructions and the paster on the windshield of the truck, operated conclusively to rebut such presumption and required dismissal of the complaint. (Rolfe V. Hewitt, 227 N. Y. 486; Goldberg v. Borden’s Condensed Milk Co., 227 N. Y. 465; Psota v. Long Island R. R. Co., 246 N. Y. 388; Clark v. Harnischfeger Sales Corp., 238 App. Div. 493; Hull v. Littauer, 162 N. Y. 569, 572.) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D. 967, 39 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6775, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fisher-v-new-york-good-humor-inc-nyappdiv-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack