People v. Hartford Transp. Co.

CourtNew York Magistrate Court
Citation6 Misc.2d 562,165 N.Y.S.2d 418
Decision Date02 January 1957
PartiesPEOPLE of the State of New York v. HARTFORD TRANSPORTATION CO., Inc. PEOPLE of the State of New York v. Benjamin DE SANTIS. City Magistrate's Court of City of New York, Traffic Court, Borough of Manhattan

Page 418

165 N.Y.S.2d 418
6 Misc.2d 562
PEOPLE of the State of New York
v.
HARTFORD TRANSPORTATION CO., Inc.
PEOPLE of the State of New York
v.
Benjamin DE SANTIS.
City Magistrate's Court of City of New York, Traffic Court,
Borough of Manhattan.
Jan. 2, 1957.

Page 419

[6 Misc.2d 563] Patrick J. Falvey, New York City, for the people.

Edward F. Bowes, New York City, for defendants.

DAVID L. MALBIN, City Magistrate.

The defendants, both individual and corporate, are charged with a violation of Section 16-c(3) of the New York State Vehicle and Traffic Law, which reads as follows:

'It shall be unlawful to transport by motor vehicle over the highways within this state any dangerous article without conspicuously marking or placarding any motor vehicle engaged in such transportation on each side and on the rear thereof with the word 'dangerous' or the common or generic name of the substance transported or its principal hazard; provided, that the commissioner of motor vehicles may, by regulation issued after a public hearing, prescribe with respect to any specific dangerous article the minimum quantities below which no placard shall be required.'

The defendant, Hartford Transportation Co., Inc., is a motor carrier authorized to operate in interstate commerce under authority granted by the Interstate Commerce Commission. Defendant DeSantis is a driver employed by the Hartford Company to operate its tractors and trailers.

Page 420

The facts were stipulated by both parties and are briefly summarized as follows:

[6 Misc.2d 564] 'Both the corporate and individual defendant admitted that on June 1, 1956, the individual defendant operated a tractor-trailer bearing New York Registration No. 383-784, while engaged in the course of his employment with the corporate defendant, which also owned the tractor-trailer; that the individual defendant operated the vehicle along the streets of the city of New York; that the vehicle's cargo was 22,750 pounds of sulphuric acid; that there were no placards bearing the legend 'Dangerous' or the legend 'Sulphuric Acid' affixed to any part of the vehicle.'

It was conceded that sulphuric acid is a corrosive liquid and thus a 'dangerous article' within the meaning of the statute, and that the weight of 22,750 pounds of corrosive liquid was sufficient to require placarding under a regulation of the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles on November 19, 1951, fixing the maximum unplacarded load at 2,500 pounds.

Defendants contend that, despite the foregoing, unless it can be shown that they knowingly violated the section in point either in that they willfully violated the statute or failed to take reasonable steps to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • People v. Carbone
    • United States
    • New York City Court
    • 7 Julio 1967
    ...fined etc. tester was used to determine the flash point as set forth in the statute. [54 Misc.2d 764] In People v. Hartford Transp. Co., 6 Misc.2d 562, p. 565, 165 N.Y.S.2d 418, p. 420 (1957) Judge Malbin in describing the legislative history of the statute found that the 'legislation was e......
  • People v. Schirtzer
    • United States
    • New York Court of Special Sessions
    • 8 Mayo 1957
    ...noted. This section reads as follows: 'All sections of the code of criminal procedure consistent with this act regulating and controlling [6 Misc.2d 562] the practice and procedure of the court of general sessions of the peace in the city and county of New York shall apply, as far as may be......
2 cases
  • People v. Carbone
    • United States
    • New York City Court
    • 7 Julio 1967
    ...fined etc. tester was used to determine the flash point as set forth in the statute. [54 Misc.2d 764] In People v. Hartford Transp. Co., 6 Misc.2d 562, p. 565, 165 N.Y.S.2d 418, p. 420 (1957) Judge Malbin in describing the legislative history of the statute found that the 'legislation was e......
  • People v. Schirtzer
    • United States
    • New York Court of Special Sessions
    • 8 Mayo 1957
    ...noted. This section reads as follows: 'All sections of the code of criminal procedure consistent with this act regulating and controlling [6 Misc.2d 562] the practice and procedure of the court of general sessions of the peace in the city and county of New York shall apply, as far as may be......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT