Schroedel v. Bullard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schroedel v. Bullard

243 A.D. 800, 278 N.Y.S. 12

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 15, 1935·Published

Opinion

Action by plaintiff to recover damages for personal injuries resulting from the negligent operation of a truck owned by the Medical Detachment, 156th Field Artillery, New York National Guard. Judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint unanimously affirmed, with costs. The plaintiff had in effect rested since it was stated by counsel on the trial, “ There is no need to put in all the evidenced” The theory of the action is that the truck at the time of the accident was in the service of the National Guard, operated by one of its officers. Defendant is not liable. (Military Law, § 15; Carmody v. Davis, 241 App. Div. 88.) Present — Hagarty, Carswell, Seudder, Tompkins and Davis, JJ.

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

Action by plaintiff to recover damages for personal injuries resulting from the negligent operation of a truck owned by the Medical Detachment, 156th Field Artillery, New York National Guard. Judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint unanimously affirmed, with costs. The plaintiff had in effect rested since it was stated by counsel on the trial, “ There is no need to put in all the evidenced” The theory of the action is that the truck at the time of the accident was in the service of the National Guard, operated by one of its officers. Defendant is not liable. (Military Law, § 15; Carmody v. Davis, 241 App. Div. 88.) Present — Hagarty, Carswell, Seudder, Tompkins and Davis, JJ.

Schroedel v. Bullard, 243 A.D. 800, 278 N.Y.S. 12 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

243 A.D. 800 (Schroedel v. Bullard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related