Case Name: Fake, Respondent, v. Kellogg, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1892-11-22
Citations: 20 N.Y.S. 985
Docket Number: 
Parties: Fake, Respondent, v. Kellogg, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 20
Pages: 985–986

Head Matter:
Fake, Respondent, v. Kellogg, Appellant.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Third Department.
November 22, 1892.)
Action by Augustus M. Fake against Dayton S. Kellogg for breach of covenant.
Argued before Mayham, P. J., and Putnam and Herrick, JJ.
George E. Phillips, (A. J. Nellis, of counsel,) for appellant. Wendell & Van Deusen, (John D. Wendell, of counsel,) for respondent.

Opinion:
Herrick, J.
I think the judgment should be affirmed. The rule of damages contended for by the appellant I do not think applies to a case like this. This can hardly be said to be a rental value for vacant lots, particularly when situated in a locality just opened up for building purposes. A large part of the value to purchasers undoubtedly consisted in the promise that streets should be opened and laid out, and the adjoining property thereto made desirable for places of residence and business. I see no occasion for an opinion. See Post v. Railroad Co., (Sup.) 3 N. Y. Supp. 172. All concur.