Case ID: nys_61/html/1138-13.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HORGAN, Respondent, v. SCHULTHEIS FT. GEORGE CASINO, Appellant.
    (City Court of New York, General Term.
    December 2, 1899.)
    Action by William G. Horgan again the Schultheis Ft. George Casino. From a ju ment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirm Lewis & Stoddard, for appellant. Charles V. Dayton, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The rental value of the to rented to defendant by plaintiff was a quest! of fact for the jury. The verdict in plaintiff favor for $200 was not excessive. The evidence submitted by plaintiff amply sustains this conclusion. No substantial evidence was offered by defendant respecting such rental value, or disputing plaintiff’s estimate of the same. The verdict of the jury, in view of this fact, was certainly just and reasonable; they having awarded plaintiff only $200, when his claim was ior over $500. No error was committed, and the judgment must be affirmed, with costs.