Millon v. Salisbury
13 Johns. 211
Opinion
Millón being a bailee for hire, and chargeable with no ill treatment, and having employed the horse to no other-use than that which was expressly agreed on, and paid for, he is not liable for such an injury as the plaintiff below complains’ pf-
As to all accidents naturally incident to the use of the horse, in the manner contracted for, the law imposes the risk on the bailor. Injustice has been done, and the judgment ought to he reversed.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Millon v. Salisbury, 13 Johns. 211 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1816).
13 Johns. 211 (Millon v. Salisbury) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Campbell v. Klein
52 Misc. 123 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1906)
Taylor v. Downey
29 L.R.A. 92 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1895)
Stewart v. Western Union R. Co.
23 F. Cas. 76 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana, 1869)
Hard v. Nearing
44 Barb. 472 (New York Supreme Court, 1865)
Conwell v. Smith
8 Ind. 530 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1857)
Mayor of Columbus v. Howard
6 Ga. 213 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1849)
Harrington v. Snyder
3 Barb. 380 (New York Supreme Court, 1848)