Lowenstein v. Chappell
New York Supreme Court
MOTION for a new trial, founded on a case and exceptions. The complaint alleged that on the 20th day of February, 1857, the defendant agreed to rent to the plaintiff a certain store, No. 74 State street, in Rochester, for the period of one year from April 1, then next, for the sum of $1000. That the plaintiff was, at the time of this agreement, in possession of a store, No. 67 State street, under a lease for five years from September 1, 1856; and after this agreement With…
Read the full summary
MOTION for a new trial, founded on a case and exceptions. The complaint alleged that on the 20th day of February, 1857, the defendant agreed to rent to the plaintiff a certain store, No. 74 State street, in Rochester, for the period of one year from April 1, then next, for the sum of $1000. That the plaintiff was, at the time of this agreement, in possession of a store, No. 67 State street, under a lease for five years from September 1, 1856; and after this agreement With the defendant, and relying thereon, he sold and assigned the lease to one Hinges, and agreed to give possession April 1,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Johnson, J.
Whether the plaintiff was entitled to recover, for the injury happening to the goods, in consequence of packing them, must depend upon the question whether such injury was the direct and necessary consequence of the defendant’s neglect or refusal to perform his agreement. The general rule is that the party injured by a breach of a contract is entitled to recover all his damages, including gains prevented, as well as losses sustained, provided they are certain, and such as might naturally be expected to follow the breach. (Griffin v. Colver, 16 N. Y. Rep. 489.) The…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Griffin v. . ColverNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Giles v. O'TooleNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Holmes v. SeelyNew York Supreme Court · 1837
3Cited by1 opinion
- Eichbaum v. Caldwell Bros.Washington Supreme Court · 1910