Cunningham v. Dorsey

6 Cal. 19
California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1856·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Justice Heydenfeldt.

Mr. Chief Justice Murray concurred.

The third instruction given by the District Court, at the request of the plaintiff, is clearly erroneous. The true rule of damages is the value of the labor performed, and the amount of profit which could fairly have been derived from the labor left unperformed by the act of the defendants. Although afterwards, at the defendants’ request, the Court laid down the correct rule, yet it is impossible to say that the erroneous instruction first given had no influence upon the jury. Both stood together and were of equal force, and we cannot by computation ascertain by which one the jury was controlled.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.

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

Cunningham v. Dorsey, 6 Cal. 19 (Cal. 1856).

6 Cal. 19 (Cunningham v. Dorsey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cowan v. Tremble
296 P. 91 (California Court of Appeal, 1931)
Nadelman v. Pitchel
36 Misc. 768 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1901)
Howe Machine Co. v. Bryson
44 Iowa 159 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1876)
Dunn v. Johnson
33 Ind. 54 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1870)
Clark v. McElvy
11 Cal. 154 (California Supreme Court, 1858)