Meyers v. Zucker

91 N.Y.S. 358
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedDecember 23, 1904
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 91 N.Y.S. 358 (Meyers v. Zucker) 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
Meyers v. Zucker, 91 N.Y.S. 358 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1904).

Opinion

MacLEAN, J.

Seeking recovery for breach of contract, the plaintiffs laid their damage in the sum of $2,000. Stating “there is $2,000 damage in this thing,” whether before, at, or after trial, may [359]*359not of itself be said to prove the fact; but if proof there be sufficient of the cost of unmanufactured goods on hand, of prospective cost and expense of manufacture, the judgment entered upon the verdict of the jury may not stand, for the jury, upon the evidence, might have found in favor of the plaintiffs for the full amount, or in favor of the defendants for no cause of action, but compromise they may not. Myers v. Myers, 86 App. Div. 73, 83 N. Y. Supp. 236. The verdict in favor of the plaintiffs for the sum of $500 being without evidentiary foundation, the judgment thereon must be reversed and a new trial ordered.

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

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

Related

Thomas F. Maher v. Isthmian Steamship Company
253 F.2d 414 (Second Circuit, 1958)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
91 N.Y.S. 358, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meyers-v-zucker-nyappterm-1904.