Seabury v. Ross

Illinois Supreme Court
Seabury v. Ross, 69 Ill. 533 (Ill. 1873)
Soholfield

Seabury v. Ross

Opinion of the Court

Mr. Justice Soholfield

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This judgment must be reversed, for the reason that there is no evidence in the record authorizing the damages assessed by the jury. The effect of the mere finding against appellant is, to authorize nominal damages only. If damages were sustained beyond that amount, it was incumbent on the appellees to prove them. The jury, in the absence of evidence, had no right to assume that appellees had sustained other than nominal damages.

We perceive no other error in the record.

Judgment reversed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Charles Seabury v. Amos M. Ross
Cited By
1 case
Status
Published
Syllabus
Replevin—damages against plaintiff, beyond nominal damages, must abe proved. Where the plaintiff fails in an action of replevin, in the absence of proof of actual damages, the defendant is entitled to nominal damages only.