From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morzieres v. Vanni

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jul 1, 1896
17 Misc. 572 (N.Y. App. Term 1896)

Opinion

July, 1896.

Ullo, Ruebsamen, Cochran Baldwin, for appellants.

Kantrowitz Esberg, for respondent.


The defendants were copartners engaged in the business of trucking and moving goods for hire and were common carriers.

They were moving household furniture for the plaintiff, including chinaware in a barrel. Defendant Renoux was carrying the barrel when the hoops gave way and the barrel dropped, breaking the china. Defendant Vanni, after looking through the barrel, agreed that they would be responsible for it, and would pay $30.

Upon this testimony the justice was justified in giving judgment for the plaintiff. The injury occurred while the goods were in the hands of defendants, who could easily show that it was unavoidable, or the result of defective packing, for which they were not responsible, if such were the case. The giving way of the hoops was not necessarily the result of defective packing, but may have been the result of negligent handling, and yet defendants do not explain it. On the contrary, one of them admits responsibility for the injury and the amount of it. This admission dispensed with further proof by plaintiff. It should be observed that defendant Vanni, who is said to have made the admission, was not called to deny it.

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

McADAM and BISCHOFF, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Morzieres v. Vanni

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jul 1, 1896
17 Misc. 572 (N.Y. App. Term 1896)
Case details for

Morzieres v. Vanni

Case Details

Full title:MARGUERITE MORZIERES, Respondent, v . JOHN VANNI et al., Appellants

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term

Date published: Jul 1, 1896

Citations

17 Misc. 572 (N.Y. App. Term 1896)
40 N.Y.S. 1145