Case ID: nys_108/html/0700-01.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

RENAULT v. SIMPSON CRAWFORD CO.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    February 7, 1908.)
    Appeal—Review—Harmless Error—Admission op Evidence.
    In an action for damages to an automobile used solely for pleasure, the admission of evidence as to its usable value during the time it was being repaired was harmless error, where the jury disregarded it by rendering a verdict for defendant
    [Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 3, Appeal and Error, §§ 4175-4177.]
    Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Twelfth, District.
    Action by George Renault against the Simpson Crawford Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
    Argued before GIEDERSEEEVE, P. J., and SEABURY and GERARD, JJ.
    Hotchkiss & Barber (Clarence P. Moser, of counsel), for appellant.
    Rose & Putzel, for respondent.
   PER, CURIAM.

It appears from the record and from the charge of the court that evidence of the usable value of the automobile during the time it was being repaired was admitted and; submitted to the jury." The court distinctly charged the jury that, if they believed this testimony, such usable value was a proper element of damage. Under the circumstances, therefore, the question as to whether one may recover the usable value of an article damaged, when that article is used solely for pleasure, is not presented for decision. The testimony as, to usable value was necessarily given by experts, which- testimony the jury might wholly disregard, and which from their verdict they evidently did disregard.

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.