Bernstein v. Feldstein

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Bernstein v. Feldstein

113 N.Y.S. 729

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 16, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 113 N.Y.S. 729 (Bernstein v. Feldstein) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bernstein v. Feldstein, 113 N.Y.S. 729 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

HENDRICK, J.

It is evident from the record that the jury should have allowed for some depreciation in the value of the fixtures. The testimony of the expert that there would be a depreciation of forty per cent, was qualified by his statement that that meant that all he would pay for it was 60 per cent, of its purchase price, and it was error to permit the testimony to stand as evidence of value. On the whole case the verdict for the plaintiff was proper, and substantial justice will be done by reducing the verdict by 40 per cent, of the value of the fixtures, that being the only evidence of the depreciation in the case.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event, unless the plaintiff stipulates to reduce the verdict to the sum of $231.80, with appropriate costs in the court below, in which event the judgment, as so modified, is affirmed, without costs in this court to either party. All concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

HENDRICK, J.

It is evident from the record that the jury should have allowed for some depreciation in the value of the fixtures. The testimony of the expert that there would be a depreciation of forty per cent, was qualified by his statement that that meant that all he would pay for it was 60 per cent, of its purchase price, and it was error to permit the testimony to stand as evidence of value. On the whole case the verdict for the plaintiff was proper, and substantial justice will be done by reducing the verdict by 40 per cent, of the value of the fixtures, that being the only evidence of the depreciation in the case.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event, unless the plaintiff stipulates to reduce the verdict to the sum of $231.80, with appropriate costs in the court below, in which event the judgment, as so modified, is affirmed, without costs in this court to either party. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

113 N.Y.S. 729, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bernstein-v-feldstein-nyappterm-1908.