From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MacGregor v. Watts

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 24, 1938
254 App. Div. 904 (N.Y. App. Div. 1938)

Opinion

June 24, 1938.


The plaintiff was the author of two manuscript plays, at least one of which had been copyrighted. She delivered these manuscripts to the defendant for the purpose of producing them as plays. For the purposes of this action for conversion, it is stipulated that the defendant lost these manuscripts and failed to return them to plaintiff on demand. After one of the plays had been copyrighted the plaintiff made certain additions, changes and alterations in the dialogue and structure of the play in the manuscript delivered to the defendant, but had no copy. The complaint was dismissed on the ground that there is no measure of damages to be applied to the plaintiff's loss and that she is entitled to nominal damages only. Obviously the plaintiff would be put to some expense in obtaining a copy of the copyrighted book. Further than that, she is entitled to recover damages even though she may be unable to establish market value. It is recognized by the courts and by text writers and in digests that a wrongdoer or one who breaches a contract may not escape liability simply because there is no market value or none of the ordinary standards for measuring the damages. The usual rule applied in cases of wearing apparel, household goods, family portraits, heirlooms and other property not possessing market value, is that the value of the commodity for which one person is responsible to another is its value to the owner, determined by considering all of the circumstances in a rational way and assessing damages through the exercise of good sense and judgment by the triers of the facts. In this process all sentimental or fanciful values are eliminated and disregarded. As a result there may be either nominal or substantial damages. ( Jones v. Morgan, 90 N.Y. 4, 10, 11; Wakeman v. Wheeler Wilson Mfg. Co., 101 id. 205, 209; Barnes v. Brown, 130 id. 372, 382, 383; Industrial General Trust, Ltd., v. Tod, 180 id. 215, 231; Lake v. Dye, 232 id. 209, 214; Central Trust Co. v. West India Improvement Co., 144 App. Div. 560; Heald v. Macgowan, 15 Daly, 233, 236; Taft v. Smith, Gray Co., 76 Misc. 283; 4 Sutherland Damages [4th ed.], §§ 1117, 1099; McCormick Damages, p. 174 et seq.; 17 C.J. 907-909; 65 id. 133-135; 8 R.C.L. pp. 487, 489; 26 id. pp. 1148-1150.) Order and judgment reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and matter remitted to Trial Term, Westchester County, pursuant to the terms of the stipulation. Lazansky, P.J., Carswell, Davis, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

MacGregor v. Watts

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 24, 1938
254 App. Div. 904 (N.Y. App. Div. 1938)
Case details for

MacGregor v. Watts

Case Details

Full title:DOLLIE SULLIVAN MacGREGOR, Appellant, v. M.S. HUNTINGTON WATTS, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 24, 1938

Citations

254 App. Div. 904 (N.Y. App. Div. 1938)

Citing Cases

Kaufman v. Gordon

In the case of Architector Co. v. Slomon ( 192 Misc. 319, 324), the court stated: "The fact that in the very…

Yarrow v. United States

However, where it is certain that damages have been caused by a wrong and the only uncertainty is as to the…