Yenne v. Folsom

New York Court of Common Pleas

Yenne v. Folsom

3 N.Y.S. 951, 16 N.Y. St. Rep. 1021, 1888 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1022

New York Court of Common Pleas·Decided May 18, 1888·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We are of the opinion that the jury has erred in its judgment in deciding the amount of damages to be awarded to the plaintiff. The damages are clearly excessive. We have therefore concluded to make a conditional order reversing the judgment, and granting a new trial, unless the plaintiff will consent to reduce the damages to the sum of $750, and affirming it for that amount if the plaintiff shall consent to such reduction.

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

Per Curiam.

We are of the opinion that the jury has erred in its judgment in deciding the amount of damages to be awarded to the plaintiff. The damages are clearly excessive. We have therefore concluded to make a conditional order reversing the judgment, and granting a new trial, unless the plaintiff will consent to reduce the damages to the sum of $750, and affirming it for that amount if the plaintiff shall consent to such reduction.

Yenne v. Folsom, 3 N.Y.S. 951, 16 N.Y. St. Rep. 1021, 1888 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1022 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1888).

Pincite

3 N.Y.S. 951 (Yenne v. Folsom) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.