Case ID: ny-st-rep_17/html/1013-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Barnard, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

SUPREME COURT—GENERAL TERM—SECOND" DEPARTMENT.
    Filed June 25, 1888.
    JOHN JUSTUS, Resp’t, v. RUDOLPH BAECKLER, App’lt.
    Detention of personal property—Damages.
    Appeal from a judgment of the county court of Dutchess county modifying a judgment for the p.aintiff in a justice’s court.
    
      Frank L. Akerly, for resp’t; A. M. <6 G. Card, for app’lt.
   Barnard, P. J.

The plaintiff by this action before a justice of the peace sought to recover the possession of household goods which the defendant refused to permit the plaintiff to take from premises belonging to defendant’s daughter. The plaintiff’s title was not questioned and the only question litigated was whether the plaintiff owed one or two dollars hack rent. He' claimed one and the defendant claimed two and kept the goods therefor? It does not appear that he had any special authority to assert the daughter’s rights, but the question of iact, in respect to the question was found in favor of plaintiff. There is no particular proof given of the value of the articles and none of the value of the use of them. The justice found the value to be six cents and the damages to he five dollars. The finding as to value will be-very injurious to the plaintiff if there he a failure to reach the property itself, for it is evident from the case that its value may be considerably more than that found to be its value. The damages for the detention seem to be arbitrarily fixed at five dollars, for as has been observed there is no direct proof. Assuming the property to he the furniture of the plaintiff’s house five dollars is practically nominal. The detention was proven to be for fifteen days from the 1st to 15th of October, 1887, when the case was tried.

The proof showed also that there was detained with the household goods a ■two-seated wagon. The justice’s judgment so far as respects the five dollars for detention should stand.

Judgment modified so as to affirm the justice’s judgment, with costs.

Dykman and Pratt, JJ,, concur.