Spooner v. Kornarens

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Spooner v. Kornarens

113 N.Y.S. 483

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 16, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 113 N.Y.S. 483 (Spooner v. Kornarens) 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

Spooner v. Kornarens, 113 N.Y.S. 483 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

GIEGERICH, J.

There is involved in this case only a question of the weight of evidence. The trial justice evidently believed the plaintiff’s version of the contract, and in this we can find no reason to differ with him. The testimony of the defendant Cleary that the entire work was undertaken for $50 is highly improbable. He himself counterclaimed $92.50 for repairing defects alone. So far as the extra work is concerned, the trial justice fixed the reasonable value of the same at only $71, instead of $104, as claimed by the plaintiff. Such deduction is fully warranted by the evidence. Moreover, the opinion of the experts as to the value of such extra work done by the plaintiff and of the defects alleged by the defendant was merely advisory, and was to be given such weight as the justice saw fit, and was not conclusive. Guyon v. Brooklyn Heights R. R. Co., 49 Misc. Rep. 514, 519, 97 N. Y. Supp. 1038 and citations.

We are satisfied that substantial justice was done by the judgment, and therefore affirm the same, with costs.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.

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

GIEGERICH, J.

There is involved in this case only a question of the weight of evidence. The trial justice evidently believed the plaintiff’s version of the contract, and in this we can find no reason to differ with him. The testimony of the defendant Cleary that the entire work was undertaken for $50 is highly improbable. He himself counterclaimed $92.50 for repairing defects alone. So far as the extra work is concerned, the trial justice fixed the reasonable value of the same at only $71, instead of $104, as claimed by the plaintiff. Such deduction is fully warranted by the evidence. Moreover, the opinion of the experts as to the value of such extra work done by the plaintiff and of the defects alleged by the defendant was merely advisory, and was to be given such weight as the justice saw fit, and was not conclusive. Guyon v. Brooklyn Heights R. R. Co., 49 Misc. Rep. 514, 519, 97 N. Y. Supp. 1038 and citations.

We are satisfied that substantial justice was done by the judgment, and therefore affirm the same, with costs.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

113 N.Y.S. 483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spooner-v-kornarens-nyappterm-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack