Torts · MBE-tested
Harry Lipshitz, as Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. Richard Fitzpatrick, Inc., Appellant, Impleaded with Another
197 A.D. 929·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1921·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
First Department,
June, 1921.
Harry Lipshitz, as Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. Richard Fitzpatrick, Inc., Appellant, Impleaded with Another.
Master and servant — permission to appeal to Court of Appeals granted.
Motion by the defendant for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from a judgment entered upon an order of the Appellate Division affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York county, and an order denying a motion for a new trial. [See 196 App. Div. 940.]
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The troublesome question involved in this case, namely, who is the master, and so responsible for the negligence of the servant, under the doctrine of respondeat superior, has not yet been so settled as to remove a particular case from the realm of uncertainty. The motion for .reargument is denied, and the application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted. Present—Clarke, P. J., Laughlin, Dowling, Merrell and Greenbaum, JJ. Motion for leave appeal granted.