Kaufmann v. Delafield
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Per curiam
Under the favorable inference rule upon a non-suit we must find that there was sufficient proof of a cause of action for fraudulent representations made out against defendant, which, undenied, would justify a recovery. This was properly so held at the trial. The cause was dismissed because of an alleged lack of damage proof, as the court viewed the evidence. We think that a sufficient showing of damage appeared to make a question for the jury as to its amount. Certainly a ruling that since plaintiff bought at market, he might also have immediately or soon thereafter sold at market for the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hotaling v. A. B. Leach & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
3Cited by11 opinions
- Valencia v. Shell Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1944
- Primavera Familienstifung v. AskinDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2001
- EF Hutton & Co. v. HeimSupreme Court of Kansas · 1985
- Letson v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 1982
- Davis v. First Interstate Bank of Idaho, N.A.Idaho Supreme Court · 1988
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.