Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1913

Lachman v. Young

Lachman v. Young
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided May 8, 1913
141 N.Y.S. 337 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Charles W. Philipbar, of New York City, for appellant., James M. Donohue, of New York City, for respondent.

Lachman v. Young

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

The action was to recover for damages to an automobile, occasioned by collision with another automobile. The fact that the rear wheel of the defendant’s automobile was damaged would seem to disprove the plaintiff’s testimony that the front of the defendant’s automobile struck his car.

The repairs made necessary by the collision were not properly proved. The testimony showed that repairs not rendered necessary by the accident were included in the bill offered in evidence, but judgment was given for the full amount. As there is no evidence by which these can be segregated, we would be compelled to grant a new trial.

The judgment will therefore be- reversed, and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.