Case ID: ad_265/html/1036-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William Daggar, Respondent, v. Elsa MacNaughton, Appellant.
   Memorandum: Proof sufficient to sustain the finding of the jury as to the item of $946 allowed by them for loss of profits is lacking. The verdict should be reduced accordingly. All concur, except Harris, J., who dissents and votes for affirmance. (As to measure of damages see Steitz v. Gifford, 280 N. Y. 15.) (The judgment is for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action. The order denies-a motion for a new trial.) Present — Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling, Harris and McCurn, JJ.