Woltag v. Reichgott

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Woltag v. Reichgott

156 N.Y.S. 133, 1915 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1275

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 26, 1915

StatusPublished

This text of 156 N.Y.S. 133 (Woltag v. Reichgott) 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

Woltag v. Reichgott, 156 N.Y.S. 133, 1915 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1275 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

SHEARN, J.

[1] Plaintiff sued to recover $24.60 for work performed. Defendant counterclaimed, alleging that by poor workmanship plaintiff had damaged a watch and ring turned over to him for plating. The measure of defendant’s damage applied was the amount paid by the defendant for another watch and another ring. As it appeared without contradiction that the damaged watch and ring remained in defendant’s possession, the correct measure of damage was the difference between the market value of the property in its alleged damaged condition and the value if the work had been performed skillfully.

[2] Defendant’s offer during the trial to turn the articles over to the plaintiff did not change the rule of damage. Plaintiff was under no obligation to accept the offer. The case is trivial in amount', but the plaintiff was none the less entitled to have it correctly decided.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with $30 costs to appellant to abide the event. 'All concur.

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

SHEARN, J.

[1] Plaintiff sued to recover $24.60 for work performed. Defendant counterclaimed, alleging that by poor workmanship plaintiff had damaged a watch and ring turned over to him for plating. The measure of defendant’s damage applied was the amount paid by the defendant for another watch and another ring. As it appeared without contradiction that the damaged watch and ring remained in defendant’s possession, the correct measure of damage was the difference between the market value of the property in its alleged damaged condition and the value if the work had been performed skillfully.

[2] Defendant’s offer during the trial to turn the articles over to the plaintiff did not change the rule of damage. Plaintiff was under no obligation to accept the offer. The case is trivial in amount', but the plaintiff was none the less entitled to have it correctly decided.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with $30 costs to appellant to abide the event. 'All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

156 N.Y.S. 133, 1915 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woltag-v-reichgott-nyappterm-1915.