Hotchkiss v. Platt
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order made at Special Term, confirming the report of a referee appointed to ascertain the damages sustained by the defendant Richardson, by reason of an order of injunction granted in said action.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order made at Special Term, confirming the report of a referee appointed to ascertain the damages sustained by the defendant Richardson, by reason of an order of injunction granted in said action. In January, 1871, the plaintiff brought an action against Clem-entina T. Richardson and others, the said Clementina then carrying on the business of selling carpets and furniture at the corner of Hudson and Canal streets, New York city, and on the 2d day of February, 1871, an order was obtained in the action appointing a receiver of the property, the order containing an injunction…
1Opinion of the Court
GILBERT, J.:
The damages to which a party who has been injured by the granting of an injunction, is entitled, are only such as have resulted directly from the injunction. (2 Wait’s Pr., 124.) Kemote damages are excluded by the very terms of the undertaking, which are that the plaintiff will pay to the defendant “ such damages as he may sustain by reason of the said injunction,” and also by the general rules of law governing the assessment of damages in analogous cases.
In this case the injunction is contained in the order appointing the receiver, which is dated February 2d, 1871. No motion to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hovey v. . the Rubber-Tip Pencil Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Collins v. SinclairIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
- Allen v. BrownNew York Supreme Court · 1872