Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, 1787

Bourke v. Bulow

Bourke v. Bulow
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · Decided July 1, 1787 · Burke, Grimke, Heyward
1 S.C.L. 49

Counsel

Rutledge and Pringle, in support of the motion,, Calhoun and Bay, contra.

Bourke v. Bulow

Opinion of the Court

By the Court Present, Burke, Heyward, and Grimke, Justices.

The jury, in this case, seem to have exercised a *53very proper discretion, by considering this rather in nature of an assumpsit for a debt due, than in nature of a covenant for a specific performance. They have given the plaintiff what the defendant appears really to have fallen in his debt; though, taking it upon the contract for delivery of flour and tobacco, they might have given larger damages. We do not think it proper to set aside a verdict, because the damages are small, in order that a plaintiff may have another chance of getting more. It is a maxim in law not to do it; nor will we depart from it, unless very peculiar circumstances indeed appear to justify it. None such we pow perceive ; therefore we overrule the motion.

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