Raven v. Smith

New York Supreme Court

Raven v. Smith

24 N.Y.S. 600, 53 N.Y. St. Rep. 857

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 28, 1893

DocketNo. 1

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 24 N.Y.S. 600 (Raven v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Raven v. Smith, 24 N.Y.S. 600, 53 N.Y. St. Rep. 857 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

BARNARD, P. J.

A large part of the plaintiff’s claim was for damages for a breach of the contract by which the plaintiff was to grade a lot at 14 cents per cubic yard. There was no real dispute as to the contract or as to its breach. After a small portion of the grading had been done, the defendant directed the work to stop. The plaintiff gave evidence that the grading could have been done for S-t cents a yard, which gave 5-¡- cents as the profit which the plaintiff would have made if he had been permitted to complete the work. The defendant offered to prove that the actual cost to a contractor per cubic yard for grading this property would be more than 14-¡- cents. This proof was rejected. The ruling was erroneous. If the proof had been received and credited, there was no basis for a verdict for $1,000 damages, which wTas the sum allowed for the refusal by defendant to permit the plaintiff to go on with the excavation. The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial granted; costs to abide event.

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

BARNARD, P. J.

A large part of the plaintiff’s claim was for damages for a breach of the contract by which the plaintiff was to grade a lot at 14 cents per cubic yard. There was no real dispute as to the contract or as to its breach. After a small portion of the grading had been done, the defendant directed the work to stop. The plaintiff gave evidence that the grading could have been done for S-t cents a yard, which gave 5-¡- cents as the profit which the plaintiff would have made if he had been permitted to complete the work. The defendant offered to prove that the actual cost to a contractor per cubic yard for grading this property would be more than 14-¡- cents. This proof was rejected. The ruling was erroneous. If the proof had been received and credited, there was no basis for a verdict for $1,000 damages, which wTas the sum allowed for the refusal by defendant to permit the plaintiff to go on with the excavation. The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial granted; costs to abide event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 N.Y.S. 600, 53 N.Y. St. Rep. 857, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raven-v-smith-nysupct-1893.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack