De Marco v. Schubert Piano Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

De Marco v. Schubert Piano Co.

123 N.Y.S. 1072

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJuly 1, 1910

StatusPublished

This text of 123 N.Y.S. 1072 (De Marco v. Schubert Piano Co.) 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

De Marco v. Schubert Piano Co., 123 N.Y.S. 1072 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

BIJUR, J.

Plaintiff sued for damages for breach of an oral agreement whereunder he was to be furnished with work, namely, the manufacturing of piano cases, for which he was paid at the rate of $3.25 per case, which contract he claims was for a definite term, and he proved that he earned about $36 per week from the carrying out ■of this contract on- his part.

The chief dispute seems to have been concerning the efforts of plaintiff to reduce the damages by obtaining other similar work or contract. The verdict of a jury in determining disputed issues of fact intelligently should not be disturbed. The verdict of $183.07 in this case, however, is inexplicable on any possible hypothesis in regard to the evidence, or on any valid mathematical ground. Under these circumstances, the conclusion is inevitable that it must have been reached by some arbitrary computation, rather than by intelligence.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant-to abide the event. All concur.

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

BIJUR, J.

Plaintiff sued for damages for breach of an oral agreement whereunder he was to be furnished with work, namely, the manufacturing of piano cases, for which he was paid at the rate of $3.25 per case, which contract he claims was for a definite term, and he proved that he earned about $36 per week from the carrying out ■of this contract on- his part.

The chief dispute seems to have been concerning the efforts of plaintiff to reduce the damages by obtaining other similar work or contract. The verdict of a jury in determining disputed issues of fact intelligently should not be disturbed. The verdict of $183.07 in this case, however, is inexplicable on any possible hypothesis in regard to the evidence, or on any valid mathematical ground. Under these circumstances, the conclusion is inevitable that it must have been reached by some arbitrary computation, rather than by intelligence.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant-to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 N.Y.S. 1072, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-marco-v-schubert-piano-co-nyappterm-1910.