Case ID: ad_172/html/0931-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Foote, J. (dissenting):", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ernest I. White, Respondent, v. Hudson Navigation Company, Appellant.
    Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Onondaga on the 8th day of January, 1915, and also from an order entered in said office on the 30th day of January, 1915, denying defendant’s motion for a new trial.
    Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concurred, except Foote, J., who dissented.
   Foote, J. (dissenting):

I dissent and vote for reversal. I think defendant’s agents supposed and had the right to suppose that Purdy was the owner of the car. He did not disclose the fact that he was the agent or chauffeur for the owner. I think there is no sufficient evidence to support the verdict to the effect that Purdy in moving the car onto the boat acted as agent of defendant.