Norton v. Willis
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions. Trover to recover the value of three horses. The opinion states the material facts. The price paid for an article is not evidence of fair market value. It often depends upon the advantages or necessities of one party or the other, changing the price in the particular instance.
Read the full summary
On exceptions. Trover to recover the value of three horses. The opinion states the material facts. The price paid for an article is not evidence of fair market value. It often depends upon the advantages or necessities of one party or the other, changing the price in the particular instance. Thus the measure of damages in cases of this sort is not what their value is to A because he has facilities for keeping them, or to B because he has none, but what is their fair market value as articles óf sale and merchandise. Gardner v. Field, 1 Cray, 151. . We have many times witnessed the rejection of…
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, J.
In an action of trover to recover the value of three horses, the plaintiff was permitted to show what the defendant gave in a lump price for these and three other horses. This was upon the question of value. The defendant’s counsel contends that evidence of what an article cost or sold for is not admissible. This proposition is not maintainable. It is a common thing to allow competent witnesses to give their opinions as to what property is worth and how much it would probably sell for. A fortiori, is it proper to prove how much the property has in fact sold for. It is sometimes competent to…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Campbell v. . WoodworthNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Whitney v. ThacherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
- Knickerbocker Life Ins. Co. v. . NelsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Whelan v. . LynchNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Wood v. Firemen's Fire InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Dehahn v. InnesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1976
- Angell v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Baglin v. Earl-Eagle Mining Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1919
- Union Hollywood Water Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Rawley v. Palo Sales, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1949
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.