Winfred Jewelry v. Spivack

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Winfred Jewelry v. Spivack

12 Misc. 2d 74, 174 N.Y.S.2d 486, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3266

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 22, 1958

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 12 Misc. 2d 74 (Winfred Jewelry v. Spivack) 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

Winfred Jewelry v. Spivack, 12 Misc. 2d 74, 174 N.Y.S.2d 486, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3266 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This matter does not involve an ordinary bailment, in view of the fact that by the terms of the receipt which defendant signed for the merchandise she assumed “ risk of all hazards ”. Under the circumstances, plaintiff was not required to prove fault or negligence on defendant’s part.

Since defendant failed to return the merchandise as agreed, plaintiff was entitled to recover the value thereof and the judgment in favor of defendant may not be permitted to stand.

The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and judgment directed for plaintiff as prayed for in the complaint, with costs; plaintiff, however, not to be entitled to body execution.

Hopstadter, J. P., Hecht and Tilzer, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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