HOFFBERG v. BUMFORD.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
June 23, 1904.)
1. Carriers of Goods—Injury to Property in Transit—Burden of Proof. Where a carrier £or hire undertook to transport property which was unbroken when delivered to the carrier, and broken when delivered by it, the burden was on the carrier to show that the injury was not due to negligence.
f 1. See' Carriers, vol. 9, Cent. Dig. § 578.
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Fourth District.
Action by Samuel Hoffberg against Marion Bumford. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.
Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and MacLEAN and SCOTT, JJ.
Max Schleimer, for appellant.
Lavelle & Gordon, for respondent.
*941SCOTT, J.
The uncontradicted evidence was to the effect that the defendant, acting as a carrier for hire, undertook to carry a sewing machine, the property of plaintiff; that the machine was in good order and unbroken when delivered to defendant, and was broken and of much less value when delivered by her. This cast the burden upon her of showing that the injury was due to no negligence on her part, and this burden she did not sustain.
Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.