Ganz v. Hi-Line Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ganz v. Hi-Line Co.

278 A.D. 761, 104 N.Y.S.2d 11, 1951 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4638

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 24, 1951·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The verdict in favor of plaintiff for less than one quarter the amount claimed was obviously a compromise, as there is no basis for it to be found in the evidence. If plaintiff here were entitled to recover at all, he should have been awarded damages sustained to the end of the term of his alleged contract less his earnings or what he might have earned during said period. A verdict which no hypothesis of the evidence could support, must be set aside (Van Her Harst v. Koenig, 249 App. Div. 235). We pass upon no other question. Judgment unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Present — Peck, P. J., Cohn, Callahan, Shientag and MeCurn, JJ.

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

The verdict in favor of plaintiff for less than one quarter the amount claimed was obviously a compromise, as there is no basis for it to be found in the evidence. If plaintiff here were entitled to recover at all, he should have been awarded damages sustained to the end of the term of his alleged contract less his earnings or what he might have earned during said period. A verdict which no hypothesis of the evidence could support, must be set aside (Van Her Harst v. Koenig, 249 App. Div. 235). We pass upon no other question. Judgment unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Present — Peck, P. J., Cohn, Callahan, Shientag and MeCurn, JJ.

Ganz v. Hi-Line Co., 278 A.D. 761, 104 N.Y.S.2d 11, 1951 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4638 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1951).

Pincite

278 A.D. 761 (Ganz v. Hi-Line Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related