American Multiple Fabric Co. v. Eureka Fire Hose Co.
New York Supreme Court
Motion by defendant for a bill of particulars. The action was for libel contained in a circular published by defendant at divers times and places throughout the several States and Canada during the years 1882, 1883, 1884 and 1885, by reason of which, plaintiff averred, that it had been greatly injured, and had lost many sales and profits which would otherwise have been made in its business.
Read the full summary
Motion by defendant for a bill of particulars. The action was for libel contained in a circular published by defendant at divers times and places throughout the several States and Canada during the years 1882, 1883, 1884 and 1885, by reason of which, plaintiff averred, that it had been greatly injured, and had lost many sales and profits which would otherwise have been made in its business. Defendant moved for an order requiring plaintiff to serve a bill of particulars showing specifically all of the injuries which plaintiff has suffered as to its good name and reputation, business and…
1Opinion of the CourtBarrett, J.
The plaintiff need not give the particulars of the injury to its good name and reputation and in its business and credit. These averments, as was said in Lane v. Williams (37 Hun, 388), may be sustained by proof of the malicious act without proof of specific instances. But the averment that the plaintiff has lost many sales and profits which it would have made in its business, but for the defendant’s acts—to wit, $5,000 or thereabouts— stands upon a different footing. That is an averment of special damage, which the plaintiff need not have made, but having chosen to make it, must…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Cruikshank v. BennettNew York Supreme Court · 1900
- Butterfield v. BennettThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1892
- Dueber Watch Case Manufacturing Co. v. American Waltham Watch Co.New York Supreme Court · 1893
- Home-Maker Co. v. AlleyNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1892