Lane v. Ajax Rubber Co.

• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: PER CURIAM.
• Citation: Lane v. Ajax Rubber Co., 99 Conn. 16, 120 A. 724 (Conn. 1923)
• Decision Date: 03 May 1923
• Parties: LANE v. AJAX RUBBER CO.

120 A. 724

99 Conn. 16

LANE v. AJAX RUBBER CO.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

May 3, 1923

Appeal from Superior Court, New Haven County; John W. Banks, Judge.

Action by Augusta Lane, administratrix, against the Ajax Rubber Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Action to recover damages for the alleged negligence of defendant's agent, brought to the superior court for New Haven county, and tried to the jury before Banks, J. Verdict for plaintiff, and motion to set verdict aside granted, and appeal by plaintiff.

Samuel E. Hoyt and Edward J. Stanford, both of New Haven, for appellant.

James D. Hart and William J. Carrig, both of New Haven, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The court set aside the verdict because the driver of defendant's car at the time of the accident was not acting within the scope of his employment. The plaintiff's case depended upon the testimony of the driver, whom the plaintiff put on the stand, and who testified that at the time of the accident he was driving a car of defendant, which he was accustomed to use in the course of his employment. On his cross-examination by defendant's counsel, he testified that at the time of the accident he had departed from his employment and was engaged upon his own matters, unconnected with his employment. There was no evidence in contradiction of this, and nothing whatever in the record to indicate that the witness was untrustworthy. The plaintiff's counsel makes the claim that it was the province of the jury to believe or disbelieve the witness when he said he was engaged upon his own business at the time of the...