Goodman Contracting Co. v. Baltimore Bridge Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Goodman Contracting Co. v. Baltimore Bridge Co.

129 N.Y.S. 1124

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 4, 1911

StatusPublished

This text of 129 N.Y.S. 1124 (Goodman Contracting Co. v. Baltimore Bridge 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

Goodman Contracting Co. v. Baltimore Bridge Co., 129 N.Y.S. 1124 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

LEHMAN, J.

The plaintiff recovered a judgment for $265.04, exclusive of costs, in an action for services rendered to defendant at its special instance and request. The record is voluminous and complicated, owing to the large number of items contained in plaintiff’s bill of particulars. A careful examination of the record discloses no prejudicial error of law, and I do not find that the judgment is against the weight of evidence. The trial justice, however, erroneously awarded judgment for the amount demanded, which is larger than the amqunt of the items claimed in the bill of particulars or shown at the trial. The judgment should be reduced to $237.04, the amount actually proven, with appropriate costs, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs of the appeal to either party. All concur.

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

LEHMAN, J.

The plaintiff recovered a judgment for $265.04, exclusive of costs, in an action for services rendered to defendant at its special instance and request. The record is voluminous and complicated, owing to the large number of items contained in plaintiff’s bill of particulars. A careful examination of the record discloses no prejudicial error of law, and I do not find that the judgment is against the weight of evidence. The trial justice, however, erroneously awarded judgment for the amount demanded, which is larger than the amqunt of the items claimed in the bill of particulars or shown at the trial. The judgment should be reduced to $237.04, the amount actually proven, with appropriate costs, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs of the appeal to either party. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

129 N.Y.S. 1124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goodman-contracting-co-v-baltimore-bridge-co-nyappterm-1911.