Stoll v. Hessen
This text of 234 A.D. 778 (Stoll v. Hessen) 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.
Opinion
Judgments of the County Court of Suffolk county reversed upon the law and the facts and a new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide the event. This action was brought by the plaintiff to recover damages for personal injuries claimed to have resulted from the negligence of the respondents, employees of defendant Hessen. The complaint was dismissed at the close of the plaintiff’s case on the ground that the respondents, as agents or servants, were not liable. The acts, alleged and proved, constituted misfeasance, for which the respondents may be held liable in damages. While the plaintiff may have treated the acts of the servants as the acts of the master, the action was not instituted upon that theory. (See Judson v. Fielding, 227 App. Div. 430; Murray v. Usher, 117 N. Y. 542.) Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Hagarty and Scudder, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
234 A.D. 778, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stoll-v-hessen-nyappdiv-1931.