Bellows & Hopkins v. Pearson
19 Johns. 172 | N.Y. Sup. Ct. | 1821
We have scrutinized the evidence, and see no ground for exemplary damages. The defendants have reason to complain that the damages are outrageously excessive. That the justice, who admitted that he was the son-in-law of the plaintiff, insisted on retaining jurisdiction, was, of itself, evidence, that the trial was not fair and impartial. The judgment ought, therefore, to be reversed.
Judgment reversed.
