12/22/2023 0 Comments Ken liss automileThe parties stipulated: 1) that the appellee delivered the roller to the appellant in good condition 2) that when it was returned it was damaged and the extent of that damage was determined to be a total loss and 3) that the fair value of the equipment when delivered to the bailee was $17,538.40. The case was tried without the intervention of a jury. The sole issue raised by this appeal is whether the appellee/bailor met its burden of proof and established by a preponderance of the evidence that the appellant/bailee failed to exercise the requisite duty of reasonable care in the use of the equipment which is the subject matter of the bailment. At trial, the presiding judge granted motions to dismiss as to these co-defendants, and no appeal was taken from this action. The original suit named a subsidiary company of the appellant and one of the employees of the subsidiary company as co-defendants. While the roller was in the custody of the appellant an accident occurred, and when the roller was re-delivered to the appellee, it was determined to be a total loss. The case arises out of a bailment which occurred when the appellee, McClung-Logan delivered to the appellant a 10 ton *586 Rexnord steel wheel roller to try out for the purpose of determining whether it was interested in purchasing the equipment. and its collision insurance carrier, appellees. Miller, Inc., appellant, from a judgment rendered in the Circuit Court for Carroll County (Weant, J., presiding) in favor of McClung-Logan Equipment Co. LISS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The cause was argued before THOMPSON, MASON and LISS, JJ. 184, September Term, 1978.Ĭourt of Special Appeals of Maryland.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |