Wilson v. Harrington
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
This action is for personal injuries and property damage sustained by plaintiff by reason of an automobile collision between his car and a car owned by defendant. The defendant admitted ownership. The plaintiff proved his damages and rested on the presumption of ownership. The defendant proved that his car was stolen by the person who was driving it at the time of the accident and that no permission had been given to operate it. There was no evidence to contradict the lack of permission. Evidence to rebut the presumption was substantial. It was not improbable or inconsistent. It was not…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Anderson v. TheisenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
- Albouyeh v. County of SuffolkNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Zinck v. WhelanNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1972
- Permenter v. Milner Chevrolet Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1956
- Kiste v. Red Cab, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1952
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.