Braverman v. Hart
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
GILDERSLEEVE, P. J.
The judgment in this case must be re-_ versed. The evidence is undisputed that the defendant some time prior to the accident had purchased the automobile and delivered it to Boes, who was driving it when the plaintiff was injured, under an agreement by which Boes was to use it for hire, and pay the purchase price to defendant out of the money derived from its use; that the defendant never had any control, directly or indirectly, over the machine after it left his possession, and never rode in it. Boes was not in the employ, or under the control or direction, of the defendant in any way, and no relation of master and servant existed between the defendant and Boes at the time the accident occurred. Clearly, if Boes was guilty of negligence in his use of the automobile, this defendant is not chargeable therewith.
Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.