From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Corcoran v. Huntington Lumber and Coal Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1924
211 App. Div. 803 (N.Y. App. Div. 1924)

Opinion

November, 1924.

Present — Kelly, P.J., Rich, Manning, Kelby and Kapper, JJ.


Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. This case was tried with Smith v. Huntington Lumber Coal Co. ( post, p. 807), decided herewith. The action is to recover for damage to an automobile in possession of plaintiff as bailee at the time of the accident. He was trying the car out with the intention of purchasing it, and as matter of fact thereafter paid for the car, which was never returned to the possession of the former owner. The action for damages to the automobile might be maintained by bailor or the bailee. But one action can be maintained, and a recovery by one party is a bar to an action by the other. ( First Commercial Bank v. Valentine, 209 N.Y. 145, 150; Green v. Clarke, 12 id. 343, 352; Baird v. Daly, 57 id. 236, 245; Thompson v. Fargo, 49 id. 188, 191.)


Summaries of

Corcoran v. Huntington Lumber and Coal Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1924
211 App. Div. 803 (N.Y. App. Div. 1924)
Case details for

Corcoran v. Huntington Lumber and Coal Company

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL CORCORAN, Respondent, v. HUNTINGTON LUMBER AND COAL COMPANY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 1, 1924

Citations

211 App. Div. 803 (N.Y. App. Div. 1924)

Citing Cases

Schwartz v. Fletcher

The testimony shows that the owner had loaned his car to the plaintiff Norman Schwartz. Bailees of personal…

Grossman Chevrolet Company v. Enockson

"The rule is well settled that where any permanent injury is done to a chattel, the bailor may maintain an…