Rothschild v. Empire State Garage

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Rothschild v. Empire State Garage

113 N.Y.S. 1145

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 24, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 113 N.Y.S. 1145 (Rothschild v. Empire State Garage) 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

Rothschild v. Empire State Garage, 113 N.Y.S. 1145 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The action is brought to recover the value of specified parts of the battery of an electric automobile, which were lost while the automobile was stored with defendant warehouseman, and for the value of three tires claimed to have been made useless, while the automobile was so stored with defendant, through the negligence of said defendant. There was also a claim of loss of the use of the automobile for 15 days at $5 a dayj but this latter claim was abandoned at the trial. The amount of plaintiff’s revised claim was $153. The justice allowed plaintiff $113.70 damages, which, with $19.41 costs, made up a judgment in plaintiff’s favor for $133.11. Defendant appeals. The proof as to the amount of damages is so incomplete and unsatisfactory that it fails to support the judgment and renders a new trial necessary. Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.

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

PER CURIAM.

The action is brought to recover the value of specified parts of the battery of an electric automobile, which were lost while the automobile was stored with defendant warehouseman, and for the value of three tires claimed to have been made useless, while the automobile was so stored with defendant, through the negligence of said defendant. There was also a claim of loss of the use of the automobile for 15 days at $5 a dayj but this latter claim was abandoned at the trial. The amount of plaintiff’s revised claim was $153. The justice allowed plaintiff $113.70 damages, which, with $19.41 costs, made up a judgment in plaintiff’s favor for $133.11. Defendant appeals. The proof as to the amount of damages is so incomplete and unsatisfactory that it fails to support the judgment and renders a new trial necessary. Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

113 N.Y.S. 1145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rothschild-v-empire-state-garage-nyappterm-1908.