Case ID: nys_154/html/1134-04.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. FOOTE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MORE, Respondent, v. CONTINENTAL INS. CO., Appellant.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
    May 26, 1915.)
    Action by Morgan B. More against the Continental Insurance Company.
   PER CURIAM.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Held that the question of waiver was properly submitted to the jury. And held, further, that the contention of the defendant that it conclusively appeared that there was no abandonment of the automobile to the defendant is not sustained by the evidence; that, in the view most favorable to the defendant, it was a question of fact which the defendant did not ask to have submitted to the qury.

FOOTE, J.

dissents upon the ground that, up to 'the time the stolen ear was found -and recovered, plaintiff liád not abandoned thé car to defendant, but was entitled to claim the e,a-r as his property had lie deemed it-for his-interest- so ’ to do; if he.had this right, then defendant had -an equal right to restore the ear to the plaintiff."