A Treatise on the Measure of Damages: Or, An Inquiry Into the Principles which Govern the Amount of Pecuniary Compensation Awarded by Courts of Justice
J. S. Voorhies, 1858 - 689 lappuses
Lietotāju komentāri - Rakstīt atsauksmi
Ierastajās vietās neesam atraduši nevienu atsauksmi.
Citi izdevumi - Skatīt visu
according action actual agreed agreement allowed already amount appears applied authority Barb bill breach brought cause charged claim common compensation consequence consideration considered contract costs court covenant decision defendant delivered demand difference entitled entitled to recover estimating eviction evidence expenses fact fixed fraud give given ground held Hill injury interest judge judgment jury justice land latter liable limited Lord loss Mass Massachusetts measure of damages nature necessary nominal notice obliged occasion opinion original owner paid party payment performance person Pick plaintiff possession premises present principle profits proper proved purchase question reason received recent recover recovery refused regard remote rent repair result rule rule of damages says sold statute suit Supreme Court surety sustained taken term thing tion tort trespass trial vendor verdict warranty Wend whole York
211. lappuse - Where two parties have made a contract which one of them has broken, the damages which the other party ought to receive in respect of such breach of contract should be such as may fairly and reasonably be considered either arising naturally, ie, according to the usual course of things, from such breach of contract itself, or such as may reasonably be supposed to have been in the contemplation of both parties, at the time they made the contract, as the probable result of the breach of it.
39. lappuse - The distinction between actions at law and suits in equity, and the forms of all such actions and suits, heretofore existing, are abolished, and there shall be, in this state, hereafter, but one form of action, for the enforcement, or protection of private rights, and the redress of private wrongs, which shall be denominated a civil action.
297. lappuse - Court erred in charging that the measure of damages was the difference between the contract price and the market price at...
83. lappuse - But the question remains, can the plaintiff then, consistently with the authorities, maintain his action, having been at least equally in fault. The answer is that, supposing that fact ascertained by the jury, but to this extent, that he merely indulged the natural instinct of a child in amusing himself with the empty cart and deserted horse, then we think that the defendant cannot be permitted to avail himself of that fact. The most blamable carelessness of his servant having tempted the child,...
78. lappuse - ... could only be supposed to have had in his contemplation the amount of injury which would arise generally, and in the great multitude of cases not affected by any special circumstances, from such a breach of contract. For had the special circumstances been known, the parties might have specially provided for the breach of contract by special terms as to the damages in that case ; and of this advantage it would be very unjust to deprive them.
478. lappuse - By the common as well as by statute law, men are often punished for aggravated misconduct or lawless acts by means of a civil action, and the damages inflicted by way of penalty or punishment given to the party injured. In many civil actions, such as libel, slander, seduction, d i-., the wrong done to the plaintiff is incapable of being measured by a money standard...
39. lappuse - The discretion of a judge is the law of tyrants : it is always unknown ; it is different in different men ; it is casual, and depends upon constitution, temper, and passion. In the best, it is oftentimes caprice ; in the worst it is every vice, folly, and passion, to which human nature is liable.'*- Lord Camden.
599. lappuse - Eminent domain is (A) the right of the government to take private property for public use...
68. lappuse - Upon a contract for a purchase, if the title proves bad, and the vendor is (without fraud) incapable of making a good one, I do not think that the purchaser can be entitled to any damages for the fancied goodness of the bargain which he supposes he has lost.