Legal Opinion

Hitchcock v. Wimpleberg

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1904Published

Motion by defendant to amend judgment.

1Opinion of the CourtSpencer, J.

This action was brought to recover possession of a gold watch of the alleged value of seventy-five dol*294lars. The complaint demanded judgment for its return or value in the form usual in actions for a chattel. On the trial, the defendant gave proof that he had destroyed the watch. The plaintiff asked that the verdict, if in favor of the plaintiff, be in the alternative for a return of the watch or for its value; but the court, under defendant’s objection, told the jury that in case they found for the plaintiff, they need only determine the value of the watch, as there was no dispute, but that…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hammond v. . MorganNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
  2. McLain v. Mathushek Piano Manufacturing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API