Stapleton v. Hertz Drivurself Stations, Inc.

131 Misc. 52, 225 N.Y.S. 661, 1927 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1238
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedDecember 22, 1927
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 131 Misc. 52 (Stapleton v. Hertz Drivurself Stations, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Stapleton v. Hertz Drivurself Stations, Inc., 131 Misc. 52, 225 N.Y.S. 661, 1927 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1238 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1927).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant rented an automobile to one Osbahr under a written agreement which provided that Osbahr would [53]*53allow no one other than himself to drive the car. After going a short distance he turned the automobile over to one Maher who drove it away while Osbahr went to his own home. Maher invited two friends to go with him and while driving collided with plaintiff’s automobile.

The issue of negligence is assumed to have been decided in plaintiff’s favor. The only point to which the learned judge below directed his attention, as shown by his opinion, is the application of section 282-e of the Highway Law (added by Laws of 1924, chap. 534, as amd. by Laws of 1926, chap. 730) to this situation. An elaborate discussion seems to be unnecessary in view of the fact that a decision of the Appellate Division in the Third Department (Owen v. Gruntz, 216 App. Div. 19) is decisive in defendant’s favor.

The distinction between a case where the driver has the owner’s permission and remains in control of the car even though he permits somebody else to actually handle the wheel and a case like the one before us (which was also the Owen case) where the party who enjoys the permission of the owner abandons the car after turning it over to some one else, is pointed out also in Grant v. Knepper (245 N. Y. 158).

Judgment reversed and a new trial granted, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Burnt, Levy and Crain, JJ.

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

Related

Barcus v. Campbell
204 P.2d 65 (California Court of Appeal, 1949)
Souza v. Corti
139 P.2d 645 (California Supreme Court, 1943)
Ballman v. Brinker
1 N.W.2d 365 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1941)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
131 Misc. 52, 225 N.Y.S. 661, 1927 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stapleton-v-hertz-drivurself-stations-inc-nyappterm-1927.