Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Stephen Krom et al., Appellants, v. John J. Levy, Respondent, 1872 — 48 N.Y. 679 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Stephen Krom et al., Appellants, v. John J. Levy, Respondent
48 N.Y. 679·New York Commission of Appeals·1872·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Stephen Krom et al., Appellants, v. John J. Levy, Respondent.
(Argued October 4, 1871;
decided January term, 1872.)
Action upon an account. Defendant set up a counterclaim for breach, on the part of plaintiffs, of a contract to plane and prepare a plate to print the backs of cards. Defendant was allowed to prove as damages the loss sustained by being deprived of the plate for several months in his business, and the referee allowed him such damages. Held, error within the rule laid down in Blanchard v. Ely (21 Wend., 342) and Griffin v. Gol/oer (16 N. Y., 489).
A. O. Morris for the appellants.
j¥. B. Home for the respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Lott, Ch. C., and Earl, C., read for reversal.
All concur.
Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide event.