Longworth v. McGrath
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Per curiam
The sole error pursued on the appeal is the inclusion in the verdict of the sum of $140 for the loss of use of the plaintiff’s automobile. The only evidence of loss of use was that of the plaintiff, who testified that the fair and reasonable rental value of a car such as the one injured per day was $10, exclusive of the cost of a driver and of gas and oil and taking into consideration the depreciation, that is, the wear and tear on it every day. Because plaintiff testified that he had never hired a car of this type, the defendant appellant Wihbey claims that his testimony upon this…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hawkins v. Garford Trucking Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- New England Iron Work's Co. v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
3Cited by6 opinions
- Hanson v. HallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
- Anderson v. Gengras Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- Hansen v. CostelloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1939
- American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Connecticut Light & Power Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1979
- Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschaapij, N. V. v. United Technologies Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1979
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.