Plotkin v. Heffner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Plotkin v. Heffner

143 N.Y.S. 1139

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1913

StatusPublished

This text of 143 N.Y.S. 1139 (Plotkin v. Heffner) 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

Plotkin v. Heffner, 143 N.Y.S. 1139 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

SEABURY, J.

This is an action to recoven damages for personal injuries. Plaintiff was in the employ of defendants. The capacity in which he was employed is a subject of dispute. While acting as driver of defendants’ horse, the horse became unmanageable and ran away. After the horse had run a considerable distance, one of the reins broke, and the plaintiff was thrown out of the wagon and injured. No negligence on the part of the defendants was proven. The attempt of the plaintiff to make it appear that the defendants agreed before the accident to be responsible for any accident that might happen was not sustained by credible proof, and in no way alters the ease. Judgment reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs. All concur.

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

SEABURY, J.

This is an action to recoven damages for personal injuries. Plaintiff was in the employ of defendants. The capacity in which he was employed is a subject of dispute. While acting as driver of defendants’ horse, the horse became unmanageable and ran away. After the horse had run a considerable distance, one of the reins broke, and the plaintiff was thrown out of the wagon and injured. No negligence on the part of the defendants was proven. The attempt of the plaintiff to make it appear that the defendants agreed before the accident to be responsible for any accident that might happen was not sustained by credible proof, and in no way alters the ease. Judgment reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 N.Y.S. 1139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/plotkin-v-heffner-nyappdiv-1913.