Torts · MBE-tested

Monarch Road Roller Company, Respondent, v. Stewart-Kerbaugh-Shanley Company, Appellant

156 A.D. 924·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1913·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

Monarch Road Roller Company, Respondent, v. Stewart-Kerbaugh-Shanley Company, Appellant. [MAJORITY] Judgment reversed- and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event. Held, first, that it was a question of fact as to whether it was the negligence of the engineer of the appellant which caused the fife;; and, second, that- in case the jury should find that it was the negligence of the respondent’s engineer which "caused the fire, then the evidence presented a question of fact as to -whether at the time the respondent’s engineer was engaged in the work of the appellant or in the work of the respondent. - All concurred, except Foote, J., who dissented'.