Cail v. MacIolek

78 A.2d 530, 96 N.H. 445, 1951 N.H. LEXIS 184
CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire
DecidedFebruary 6, 1951
Docket3991
StatusPublished

This text of 78 A.2d 530 (Cail v. MacIolek) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cail v. MacIolek, 78 A.2d 530, 96 N.H. 445, 1951 N.H. LEXIS 184 (N.H. 1951).

Opinion

Blandin, J.

The issues here are whether the testimony of the plaintiff as to what he paid for repairs to his automobile is admissible and if so whether it is sufficient to sustain the verdict. We believe the evidence is competent and warrants the verdict. The fair inference to be drawn from the uncontradicted testimony of the plaintiff was that these repairs were made necessary by the accident and that he considered them reasonable in amount. In similar situations other courts have held such evidence admissible and sufficient to sustain a verdict. Malinson v. Black, 83 Cal. App. (2d) 375; Mazer v. Levy, 260 N. Y. Supp. 823. We are in accord with this view and it follows that the order must be

Judgment on the verdict.

All concurred.

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

Related

Mazer v. Levy
146 Misc. 823 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
78 A.2d 530, 96 N.H. 445, 1951 N.H. LEXIS 184, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cail-v-maciolek-nh-1951.