Case ID: misc_27/html/0843-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Michael Sess et al., Appellants, v. David Richey et al., Respondents.
    Appeal from a judgment in favor of defendants.
    Leopold Leo (William Haupt, of counsel), for appellants.
    Edwards & Bryan (Robert H. Patten, 2d, of counsel), for-respondents.
   Per Curiam.

We concur in the verdict of the jury. They believed that if plaintiffs had been allowed to perform their contract: with defendants they would have lost money instead of making a profit; they evidently wished to prevent defendants from recovering two bills of costs herein, therefore, they rendered a verdict for-plaintiffs for nominal damages supposing that such a verdict would so save-plaintiffs. A verdict in favor of defendants would have been justified by the evidence.' After a careful perusal of the-verdict, we think that no injustice was done plaintiffs.

Present: Eitzsimohs, Ch. J., and O’Dwyeb, J.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.