Case ID: misc2d_63/html/0489-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Joseph Klotz, Respondent, v. El Morocco International, Ltd., Appellant, et al., Defendant.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    December 6, 1968.
    
      
      Anthony G. Di Falco for appellant. Herman Brothers for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

The record clearly establishes the defendant exercised that degree of ordinary care required of a bailee for mutual benefit. Consequently, the subsequent loss by defendant of the vehicle here involved was not occasioned by any negligence on the part of the def endant bailee.

The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and judgment directed for defendant, with costs.

Concur — Streit, Gold and Hoestadter, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.