From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Heuer v. Molia

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Feb 1, 1901
34 Misc. 777 (N.Y. App. Term 1901)

Opinion

February, 1901.

Olcott Messiter (Hubert F. Breitweiser and J. Van Vechten Olcott, of counsel), for appellant.

Rabe Keller, for respondent.


This is an appeal from a judgment entered in the Municipal Court of the city of New York, in favor of the respondent and against the appellant, for the sum of $489.17. The action was brought to recover damages for the destruction of respondent's property caused by the running away of a horse owned by the appellant, and coming into collision with a show window in the appellant's store, breaking the plate glass thereof and destroying goods displayed therein. It is conceded that a runaway occurred and that the respondent suffered damage thereby. The only other questions involved in the appeal are the amount of damage done, the vicious propensity of the horse to run away and the owner's knowledge of it. These questions were all sharply contested, and the record shows that both sides presented testimony concerning each of them. The evidence on the part of the respondent is amply sufficient to support the judgment and it must be affirmed, with costs.

ANDREWS, P.J., and O'GORMAN, J., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Heuer v. Molia

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Feb 1, 1901
34 Misc. 777 (N.Y. App. Term 1901)
Case details for

Heuer v. Molia

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM HEUER, Respondent, v . LOUIS MOLIA, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term

Date published: Feb 1, 1901

Citations

34 Misc. 777 (N.Y. App. Term 1901)

Citing Cases

Lewis v. Best-By-Test Garage

Brown v. Holmes, 21 Kan. 687, involved only the question as to whether or not the appellee had waived his…