Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
JOSEPH KLOTZ v. EL MOROCCO INTERNATIONAL (12/06/68)
NEW YORK SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
1968.NY.43764 <http://www.versuslaw.com>; 312 N.Y.S.2d 60; 63 Misc. 2d 489
December 6, 1968
JOSEPH KLOTZ, RESPONDENT,v.EL MOROCCO INTERNATIONAL, LTD., APPELLANT, ET AL., DEFENDANT
Klotz v. El Morocco Int., 56 Misc. 2d 319, reversed.
Anthony G. Di Falco for appellant.
Herman Brothers for respondent.
Concur -- Streit, Gold and Hofstadter, JJ.
Author: Per Curiam
Klotz v. El Morocco Int., 56 Misc. 2d 319, reversed.
Concur -- Streit, Gold and Hofstadter, JJ.
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 defendant bailee.
The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and judgment directed for defendant, with costs.