Millon v. Salisbury — 13 Johns. 211

Majority

p. 211

Millon against Salisbury.

Headnote

Any damage befalling a chattel while it the hands of a bailee, without his misconduct» and while the chattel is employed in the use for which0 It was bailed» must beaustained by the bailor. So, if a horse be. hired to go a journey, and during the due prosecution o? the journey, without any ill treatment by the hirer, become lame, the hirer is not answerable fair

IN ERROR, on certiorari to a justice’s court.

Salisbury, the plaintiff below, brought an action against Millón for the hire of, and injury done to, a horse belonging to Salisbury.

The defendant below hired the horse to go from Cocksackie to Schodack, and the next day after his arrival at the latter place, the horse was found to be lame in one foot; and the lameness increasing, the defendant below was obliged to leave the horse there, and hire another with which to return. About four weeks after, the horse was brought home, and showed signs of gravel working out above the hoof. There was no evidence of improper treatment of the horse ; but, notwithstanding, a verdict and judgment were given for the plaintiff below.

Millón being a bailee for hire, and chargeable with no ill treatment, and having employed the horse to no other-use than that which was expressly agreed on, and paid for, he is not liable for such an injury as the plaintiff below complains’ pf-

As to all accidents naturally incident to the use of the horse, in the manner contracted for, the law imposes the risk on the bailor. Injustice has been done, and the judgment ought to he reversed.

Judgment reversed.