
    PARLATO v. THOMAS.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    May, 1910.)
    Animals (§ 23)—Liability of Bailee for Hire.
    The relation existing between the parties, plaintiff having delivered his horse to defendant to be kept by defendant in his stable at a certain amount per month, plaintiff to feed it, was that of bailor and bailee for mutual benefit, requiring defendant only to exercise ordinary care, so that he was not liable for theft of the horse, in the absence of proof that it was through his negligence or wrongful act.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Animals, Cent. Dig. §§ 43-48; Dec. Dig. § 23.*]
    
      Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, First District.
    Action by Salvatore Parlato against Hugh Thomas. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before SEABURY, GUY, and BIJUR, JJ.
    Charles W. Gould, for appellant.
    Daniel F. Kiely, for respondent.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   SEABURY, J.

The plaintiff sues to recover the value of a horse, which he delivered to the defendant upon the understanding that the defendant was to keep it in his stable for $5 per month. Under the agreement the plaintiff was to feed the horse. The horse was stolen. The relation existing between the plaintiff and the defendant was that of bailor and bailee for mutual benefit. The defendant’s duty as bailee merely required him to exercise ordinary care, and .he was not liable for the loss of the horse, in the absence of proof that the loss was occasioned by his negligence or wrongful act. Stewart v. Stone, 127 N. Y. 500, 506, 28 N. E. 595, 14 L. R. A. 215; Cramer v. Klein, 127 App. Div. 146, 111 N. Y. Supp. 469.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.  