Renault v. Simpson Crawford Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Renault v. Simpson Crawford Co.

108 N.Y.S. 700

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedFebruary 7, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 108 N.Y.S. 700 (Renault v. Simpson Crawford 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

Renault v. Simpson Crawford Co., 108 N.Y.S. 700 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

PER, CURIAM.

It appears from the record and from the charge of the court that evidence of the usable value of the automobile during the time it was being repaired was admitted and; submitted to the jury." The court distinctly charged the jury that, if they believed this testimony, such usable value was a proper element of damage. Under the circumstances, therefore, the question as to whether one may recover the usable value of an article damaged, when that article is used solely for pleasure, is not presented for decision. The testimony as, to usable value was necessarily given by experts, which- testimony the jury might wholly disregard, and which from their verdict they evidently did disregard.

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

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

PER, CURIAM.

It appears from the record and from the charge of the court that evidence of the usable value of the automobile during the time it was being repaired was admitted and; submitted to the jury." The court distinctly charged the jury that, if they believed this testimony, such usable value was a proper element of damage. Under the circumstances, therefore, the question as to whether one may recover the usable value of an article damaged, when that article is used solely for pleasure, is not presented for decision. The testimony as, to usable value was necessarily given by experts, which- testimony the jury might wholly disregard, and which from their verdict they evidently did disregard.

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 N.Y.S. 700, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/renault-v-simpson-crawford-co-nyappterm-1908.