Legal Opinion

Cohen v. City Canal Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 25, 1952PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

The only evidence introduced as to the value of the merchandise lost was that it was reasonably worth $4,577.49. The jury’s verdict in the sum of $2,400 was obviously a compromise of liability or a compromise of the amount awarded plaintiff, which no hypothesis of the evidence could support. A judgment based on such compromise verdict cannot be sustained. (Friend v. Morris D. Fishman, Inc., 302 N. Y. 389; McDonald v. Walter, 40 N. Y. 551; Van Der Harst v. Koenig, 249 App. Div. 235; Delisky v. Leonard, 189 App. Div. 623; Ferguson v. Chuck, 194 App. Div. 583.)

Moreover, we think, that in the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. McDonald v. . WalterNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
  2. Van Der Harst v. KoenigAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1936
  3. Friend v. Morris D. Fishman, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1951
  4. Ferguson v. ChuckAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
  5. Delisky v. LeonardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Storey v. MadsenOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Boudreau v. Damas Food Market Corp.Civil Court of the City of New York · 1966
  3. Workman v. Bolen, New York County Courts1971
  4. Gilchrist v. Winmar J. Ford, Inc.Nassau County District Court · 1974
  5. Storey v. MadsenOregon Supreme Court · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API