Case ID: nys_93/html/0532-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SCOTT, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ANDERSON v. BLOCK.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    April 24, 1905.)
    Contracts—Breach—Amount op Recovery—Pleading.
    Where, in an action for damages for breach of a contract in which plaintiff pleaded expenditures for incidental expenses in addition to damage from wages lost, but failed to give any proof thereof, a judgment allowing recovery therefor was erroneous.
    Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Tenth District.
    Action by Peter J. Anderson against Eugene H. Block. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Modified.
    Argued before SCOTT, P. J., and LEVENTRITT and GREEN-BAUM, JJ.
    Moses R. Ryttenberg, for appellant.
    Alexander Lamont, for respondent.
   SCOTT, P. J.

The plaintiff recovered judgment for $63 damages and costs. He claimed, among other things, wages at $20 a week from December 4th, and $3 for incidental expenses. He was the only witness in his own behalf, and his character, as disclosed by his own evidence, is such that no credence should be given to any statement as to which he is contradicted. There can be no doubt that he was discharged for sufficient cause on December 9th or 10th, and his only just claim is for the weeks salary for the week ending December 10th. He gave no proof of the expenditure of the $3.

The judgment should be reduced to $20, and, as so reduced, affirmed, without costs. All concur.