Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

29 Misc. 640

Birnhak v. Hollender

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · decided 1899-11-15

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiff in the Municipal Court, fifth district, borough of' Manhattan.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1987

Relies on Devlin v. Mayor of New York

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1899-11-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

MacLeae, J.

¶1Testimony was given at the trial of this action tending to establish that the plaintiff undertook with the defendant to furnish certain material, and, by himself and others, to do certain work for the sum of sixty dollars, and that after part performance he was prevented by the defendant from completing his undertaking. Thereupon he was awarded a judgment for the full sum of sixty dollars. This was contrary to law, for, according to the well-settled rule respecting the measure of damages in an action for a violation of an executory agreement, the party who has been wrongfully deprived of the gains and profits may recover as an equivalent, and by way of damages, only the difference between the contract price, the amount which he would have earned and been entitled to recover on performance, and the amount which it would have cost him to perform the contract. Devlin v. Mayor, 63 N. Y. 8; Masterton v. Mayor, 7 Hill, 61. The judgment should be reversed.

¶2Freedmae, P. J., and Leveetbitt, J., concur.

¶3Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

/29/misc/640 · .json · Public domain