Case ID: minn_36/html/0227-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Gilfillan, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

A. S. Meacham vs. Edward Cooper.
    December 18, 1886.
    Complaint — Breach, of Warranty — Averment of Damage. — In an action for breach of warranty a general allegation of damage is sufficient to admit proof of general damages; i. e., such as necessarily accrue from the breach.
    Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Nobles county, Perkins, J., presiding, refusing a new trial. At the trial the plaintiff’s evidence of damage was merely evidence of the difference between what the horse was worth when sold, and what it would have been worth had it been as warranted.
    
      
      Daniel Rohrer, for appellant.
    
      L. S. Nelson, for respondent.
   Gilfillan, C. J.

We can see, in this case, no point that really deserves special mention. The one that comes nearest to it is that no facts were pleaded under which damages could be measured. The action is for breach of warranty of a horse. The complaint alleges only general damages; that is, that by the breach the plaintiff sustained damage in a certain sum. That is the only allegation required where only general damages, i. e., such as necessarily accrue from the cause of action alleged, are claimed. If special damages are claimed, the facts entitling the party must, as a general rule, be pleaded.

Order affirmed.