![]() ![]() Testimony at trial indicated that any person desiring to take a "Checker Cab" could hail one from the street or call a single telephone number, Woodward 3-7000. Plaintiffs appeal from that decision as of right.Īfter the trial judge granted the motion for a directed verdict, the case proceeded without Checker Cab Company, and a judgment was entered in favor of plaintiffs against Tim Castillo. That motion was granted, with the trial judge holding that Checker was actually an agent of the cab owners. At the close of plaintiffs' proofs, Checker moved for a directed verdict of no cause of action, on grounds that there had been no showing of control by Checker over the various operations of the drivers. Plaintiffs attempted to impose liability upon Checker Cab by proving that a master-servant or employer-employee relationship existed between Checker and the cab driver, Wendell West. These two cases were consolidated for trial. Alleging that the accident was caused by West's negligence, plaintiffs brought separate suits against Tim Castillo and defendant, Checker Cab Company. ![]() Plaintiffs' car collided with a Checker taxicab driven by Wendell West, and owned by Tim Castillo. Plaintiffs, Gilmer and Dorothy Thomas, were *155 injured in an automobile accident occurring on June 21, 1970. We hold that proof that the company is furnishing services to these taxicabs, such as a trade name, headquarters, or radio dispatching, is sufficient to avoid a directed verdict prior to defendant's proofs. ![]() We are asked to decide here whether a person injured by the tortious conduct of a "Checker" taxicab driver has presented sufficient proofs to impose liability upon defendant, Checker Cab Company. Decided December 8, 1975.īarbara, Wisok, Tavoularis, Ruby & Domol, P.C., for plaintiffs.Īugust, Thompson, Sherr & Miller, P.C., for defendant.īefore: BRONSON, P.J., and V.J. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |