V. Loewer's Gambrinus Brewery Co. v. James McGinn Bros.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

V. Loewer's Gambrinus Brewery Co. v. James McGinn Bros.

102 N.Y.S. 1149

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedFebruary 11, 1907

StatusPublished

This text of 102 N.Y.S. 1149 (V. Loewer's Gambrinus Brewery Co. v. James McGinn Bros.) 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

V. Loewer's Gambrinus Brewery Co. v. James McGinn Bros., 102 N.Y.S. 1149 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

MacLEAN, J.

The complaint herein was properly dismissed as to the defendant Ficke, because there was no proof that he was the owner of the wagon in collision on Thirty-Seventh street, between the North River and Eleventh avenue, with a wagon presumably belonging to and in the service of his codefendants (Norris v. Kohler, 41 N. Y. 42, 45); but as to the latter there arose, under the doctrine of Loudoun v. Eighth Ave. R. R. Co., 162 N. Y. 380, 384, 56 N. E. 988, for submission to the jury an issue of negligence, meager as were the details of the occurrence. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs as to the respondent Ficke, and reversed as to the defendant Mc-Ginn Bros., and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Judgment affirmed as to the respondent Ficke, with costs, and reversed as to the defendant McGinn Bros., with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

MacLEAN, J.

The complaint herein was properly dismissed as to the defendant Ficke, because there was no proof that he was the owner of the wagon in collision on Thirty-Seventh street, between the North River and Eleventh avenue, with a wagon presumably belonging to and in the service of his codefendants (Norris v. Kohler, 41 N. Y. 42, 45); but as to the latter there arose, under the doctrine of Loudoun v. Eighth Ave. R. R. Co., 162 N. Y. 380, 384, 56 N. E. 988, for submission to the jury an issue of negligence, meager as were the details of the occurrence. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs as to the respondent Ficke, and reversed as to the defendant Mc-Ginn Bros., and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Judgment affirmed as to the respondent Ficke, with costs, and reversed as to the defendant McGinn Bros., with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

102 N.Y.S. 1149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/v-loewers-gambrinus-brewery-co-v-james-mcginn-bros-nyappterm-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack