From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ford v. Transport Holding Corporation

Supreme Court of Idaho
Dec 26, 1974
529 P.2d 784 (Idaho 1974)

Opinion

No. 11375.

December 26, 1974.

APPEAL FROM DISTRICT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, ADA COUNTY, MARION J. CALLISTER, J.

David W. Hyde of Martin, Chapman, Martin Lyons, Boise, for defendant-appellant.

Allen R. Derr of Derr, Walters Cantrill, Boise, for plaintiff-respondent.


Respondent Edwin E. Ford left his truck with appellant Transport Holding Corporation for repairs. After the repairs were completed, the appellant placed the vehicle in its lot without checking the antifreeze level in the radiator. On or about October 29, 1971, the temperature fell to 11°, and the engine block froze and burst. The trial court found for the plaintiff owner against appellant in the amount of $5,119.32, and appellant has appealed.

The trial court, applying the rule announced by this Court in Low v. Park Price Company, 95 Idaho 91, 503 P.2d 291 (1972), held that appellant had not satisfied its burden of showing that it used reasonable care in protecting the bailed property and therefore held that appellant was negligent. We have reviewed the record and find there is substantial evidence to support the trial court's finding and therefore it will not be disturbed. Benner v. Farm Bureau Mutual Ins. Co. of Idaho, Inc., 96 Idaho 311, 528 P.2d 193 (1974). We have reviewed the other assignments of error of appellant and find no reversible error.

Judgment affirmed. Costs to respondent.


Summaries of

Ford v. Transport Holding Corporation

Supreme Court of Idaho
Dec 26, 1974
529 P.2d 784 (Idaho 1974)
Case details for

Ford v. Transport Holding Corporation

Case Details

Full title:edwin E. FORD, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. TRANSPORT HOLDING CORPORATION…

Court:Supreme Court of Idaho

Date published: Dec 26, 1974

Citations

529 P.2d 784 (Idaho 1974)
529 P.2d 784

Citing Cases

Southside Water and Sewer District v. Murphy

" Rptr.Tr., Vol. 2, pp. 35-37. The district court's findings were supported by substantial evidence and will…

Beare v. Stowes' Builders Supply, Inc.

No damages or offset were allowed for this omission, however, because there was no proof that the freezing…