Court Opinion

ID: 9829290
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:09:55.705064+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:59.528551
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
A careful examination of the evidence in this case has convinced us that we were in error in holding that the evidence indicated the amount of appellee’s profits with sufficient certainty to enable the jury to determine this issue. The appellee did not state the amount of profits which she estimated she would have received, but for the injury to her goods. She did not state the gross amount of her sales during any corresponding season, nor the percentage of profits which she realized; nor did she state the amount of her sales after the damage. While it is reasonably apparent that she lost some profits, there is nothing in the testimony from which the jury could base an *305estimate as to the same. Their verdict was necessarily a pure guess on this matter. Our view of the law with reference to loss of profits was fully stated in the case of Amer. Construction Co. v. Caswell (Tex. Civ. App.) 141 S. W. 1016. See, also, on this point Fraser et al. v. Mining Co., 9 Tex. Civ. App. 210, 28 S. W. 714; Walter Box Co. v. Blackburn (Tex. Civ. App.) 157 S. W. 220; Midkiff v. Benson (Tex. Civ. App.) 225 S. W. 186; Hedrick v. Smith (Tex. Civ. App.) 146 S. W. 305.
For the reason that the judgment of the trial court was erroneous, in allowing appellee damages by way of loss of profits, and for that reason alone, the motion for rehearing is granted, and this cause is reversed and remanded.
Motion granted.-