Hoffberg v. Bumford
88 N.Y.S. 940
Opinion
The uncontradicted evidence was to the effect that the defendant, acting as a carrier for hire, undertook to carry a sewing machine, the property of plaintiff; that the machine was in good order and unbroken when delivered to defendant, and was broken and of much less value when delivered by her. This cast the burden upon her of showing that the injury was due to no negligence on her part, and this burden she did not sustain.
Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hoffberg v. Bumford, 88 N.Y.S. 940 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1904).
88 N.Y.S. 940 (Hoffberg v. Bumford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Carleton v. Union Transfer & Storage Co.
137 A.D. 225 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1910)