
    Edward E. Young, Respondent, v. International Motor Company, Appellant.
    
      Young v. International Motor Co., 175 App. Div. 949, affirmed.
    (Argued January 16, 1919;
    decided February 4, 1919.)
    Appeal from an order of the Appellate ’Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered November 18, 1916, reversing a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon' a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term and granting a new trial in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged- to have been sustained by plaintiff through the negligence of defendant. It appeared that while plaintiff was riding in a carriage it was struck by a motor truck driven by one Bowman, who was in the general employment of the defendant and was sent by the defendant to deliver a motor truck to Winfield Pugsley at Peekskill, and to remain there for a week to demonstrate the truck and show Pugsley’s man how to operate it, in pursuance of an agreement made between Pugsley and the defendant at the time Pugsley executed the contract for the purchase of the motor truck from the defendant. It was admitted that the truck was brought to Peekskill by Bowman as a servant of the defendant, but defendant contended that after he delivered the truck to Pugsley the relationship of the parties changed and he, thereupon, became the servant of Pugsley, so that Pugsley and not the defendant became chargeable with responsibility for Bowman’s negligent act.
    
      Frederick W. Catlin and Robert H. Woody for appellant.
    
      James W. Husted for respondent.
   Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered against appellant on the stipulation, with costs in all courts; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Collin, Cuddeback, Cardozo, Pound, Crane and Andrews, JJ.  