History
  • No items yet
midpage
Dillon v. Mundet
145 N.Y.S. 975
N.Y. App. Term.
1914
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

[1] Upon the facts of this case there can be no doubt that Torrisella, at the time of the collision, was engaged in the business and on behalf of the appellant and acting within the scope of his employment, and that Brown was assisting him therein at Torrisella’s request. The appellant was therefore liable for Brown’s negligence. Althorf v. Wolfe, 22 N. Y. 355; 26 Cyc. 1521.

[2] The plaintiff has recovered as part of his damages the amount *976paid for storage of the automobile from the time of the collision until he exchanged it, and also for the wages paid his chauffeur during the same period. This was erroneous. Together this amounts to $71.57.

The judgment will therefore be reduced to $242.25, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs. All concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Dillon v. Mundet
Court Name: Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Date Published: Feb 13, 1914
Citation: 145 N.Y.S. 975
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Term.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.