Case ID: nys_63/html/0198-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HUTKOFF v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    March 9, 1900.)
    Carriers — Liability—Damaged Goods.
    Where there was sufficient evidence to warrant a finding that glass shipped over defendant’s road was delivered in good condition on the car, and it was conceded that, if such was the fact, defendant was liable for its delivery at its destination in a broken condition, a verdict assessing damages will be sustained.
    Appeal from city court of New York, general term.
    Action by Nathan Hntkoff against the Pennsylvania Railroad Company. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff (61 N. Y.. Snpp. 254), defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before TRUAX, P. J., and DUGRO and SCOTT, JJ.
    Robinson, Biddle & Ward, for appellant.
    Nathan, Leventritt & Perham, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The evidence of the witness Sammeck warrants a conclusion that the glass was in good condition when it was delivered upon the car. As the defendant’s counsel upon the argument conceded that, if this conclusion was warranted, the judgment must be affirmed, it is affirmed, with costs.