Ward v. Metropolitan Distributors, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ward v. Metropolitan Distributors, Inc.

268 A.D. 994, 51 N.Y.S.2d 858, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4604

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

DecidedDecember 4, 1944

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 268 A.D. 994 (Ward v. Metropolitan Distributors, Inc.) 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

Ward v. Metropolitan Distributors, Inc., 268 A.D. 994, 51 N.Y.S.2d 858, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4604 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

The appellant’s truck was leased to the respondent for use in the latter’s business, and during such use the plaintiff was injured. Payment was made for plaintiff’s injuries, and the court decided the issues raised in the cross complaints asserted by the two defendant corporations against each other. The lease agreement between appellant and respondent provided that appellant would assume the liability of respondent for injuries resulting from the operation of the leased vehicle while being used or operated in the respondent’s usual course of business. Judgment in favor of respondent unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Close, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Adel and Lewis, JJ. [See post, p. 1060.]

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

The appellant’s truck was leased to the respondent for use in the latter’s business, and during such use the plaintiff was injured. Payment was made for plaintiff’s injuries, and the court decided the issues raised in the cross complaints asserted by the two defendant corporations against each other. The lease agreement between appellant and respondent provided that appellant would assume the liability of respondent for injuries resulting from the operation of the leased vehicle while being used or operated in the respondent’s usual course of business. Judgment in favor of respondent unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Close, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Adel and Lewis, JJ. [See post, p. 1060.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 A.D. 994, 51 N.Y.S.2d 858, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4604, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ward-v-metropolitan-distributors-inc-nyappdiv-1944.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack