TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Kerry v. Pacific Marine Supply Co.

Kerry v. Pac. Marine Supply Co., 54 P. 262 (Cal. 1898)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
California Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
August 26, 1898
Docket
No. S. F. No. 818
Citations
54 P. 2626 Cal. Unrep. 118
Syllabus
Damages—Appeal—Modification.—Finding of Damages in Excess of amount averred in complaint established damages to amount claimed, so that judgment for the excessive amount need not be reversed, but merely modified.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

Upon further consideration, we are of opinion that a reversal of the judgment in this ease is not necessary, and that a modification will meet the ends of justice. The finding of damage is for an amount greater than the complaint avers. Still, the finding necessarily establishes that plaintiff was damaged to the amount which he claims. The judgment may, therefore, be modified, and it will still be supported by the finding in question. All other propositions having been resolved in favor of plaintiff and respondent, it would be a hardship to compel a new trial, if that result could properly be avoided. We think this may be done, for the reasons indicated, which reasons find support in many cases: Fischer v. Blank, 138 N. Y. 669 , 34 N. E. 397 ; Cox v. Railway Co., 77 Iowa, 478 , 42 N. W. 429 ; Miller v. Wilkins, 79 Ga. 675 , 4 S. E. 261 ; Frankhouser v. Cannon, 50 Kan. 621 , 32 Pac. 379 ; Winter v. Fulstone, 20 Nev. 260 , 21 Pac. 201 , 687. The two final sentences of the opinion are therefore eliminated. The judgment of reversal is vacated. The court below is directed to modify its judgment by reducing the same in the sum of $239, or one-half of one cent per lineal foot for all of the piles. It is further ordered that appellant have his costs upon this appeal.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 6

DepthCaseCited by
Cox v. Burlington & Western Ry. Co., 42 N.W. 429 (Iowa 1889) 5
Miller v. Wilkins & Berrien, 4 S.E. 261 (Ga. 1887) 4
Frankhouser v. Cannon, 50 Kan. 621 (1893) 11
Winter v. Fulstone, 21 P. 687 (Nev. 1889) 6
Fischer v. Blank, 34 N.E. 397 (N.Y. 1893) 6

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list