Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

LLOYD CAIL v. THOMAS MACIOLEK

Testimony of the plaintiff as to what he paid for repairs to his motor vehicle after the collision was admissible and where uncontradicted it was sufficient to sustain the verdict.

BLANDIN, J.

The issues here are whether the testimony of the plaintiff as to what he paid for repairs to his automobile is admissible and if so whether it is sufficient to sustain the verdict. We believe the evidence is competent and warrants the verdict. The fair inference to be drawn from the uncontradicted testimony of the plaintiff was that these repairs were made necessary by the accident and that he considered them reasonable in amount. In similar situations other courts have held such evidence admissible and sufficient to sustain a verdict. Malinson v. Black, 83 Cal.App. (2d) 375; Mazer v. Levy, 260 N.Y. Supp. 823. We are in accord with this view and it follows that the order must be

Judgment on the verdict.

All concurred.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CAIL v. MACIOLEK
(Feb 6, 1951)