Dempsey v. Fox

Superior Court of Rhode Island

Dempsey v. Fox

7 R.I. Dec. 131

CourtSuperior Court of Rhode Island

DecidedFebruary 26, 1931

DocketNo. 78090

StatusPublished

This text of 7 R.I. Dec. 131 (Dempsey v. Fox) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dempsey v. Fox, 7 R.I. Dec. 131 (R.I. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

OAPOTO STO, J.

After verdict for the plaintiffs in the sum of $400, the defendant filed a motion for a new trial upon the usual grounds.

The controversy in this case simmered down to a leaky roof in a house built by the defendant for the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs maintained that the defendant, through misrepresentation, had deviated from the height of the roof as shown in the plan which was shown to them when the contract was entered into. The defendant contended that he had built the house strictly in accordance with the original and only plans, and that he had never received any complaints whatsoever from the plaintiffs.

The testimony presented a clear cut issue of fact. The jury was justified in returning the finding which it did both as to liability and damages.

■Motion for new trial denied.

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

OAPOTO STO, J.

After verdict for the plaintiffs in the sum of $400, the defendant filed a motion for a new trial upon the usual grounds.

The controversy in this case simmered down to a leaky roof in a house built by the defendant for the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs maintained that the defendant, through misrepresentation, had deviated from the height of the roof as shown in the plan which was shown to them when the contract was entered into. The defendant contended that he had built the house strictly in accordance with the original and only plans, and that he had never received any complaints whatsoever from the plaintiffs.

The testimony presented a clear cut issue of fact. The jury was justified in returning the finding which it did both as to liability and damages.

■Motion for new trial denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 R.I. Dec. 131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dempsey-v-fox-risuperct-1931.