Page 137

112 38 NORTH DAKOTA REPORTS T. Noye Mfg. Co. 66 Minn. 156, 68 N. W. 854; McNaughton v. Wahl, 99 Minn. 92, 116 Am. St Rep. 389, 108 N. W. 467; Tictjen v. Snead, 3 Ariz. 195, 24 Pac. 324; DeWitt v. Berry, 134 U. S. 306, 33 L. ed. 896, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 536; Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating Mach. Co...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Format: Text
Language:unknown
Published: North Dakota State Library
Subjects:
Online Access:http://cdm16921.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p16921coll3/id/36513
Description
Summary:112 38 NORTH DAKOTA REPORTS T. Noye Mfg. Co. 66 Minn. 156, 68 N. W. 854; McNaughton v. Wahl, 99 Minn. 92, 116 Am. St Rep. 389, 108 N. W. 467; Tictjen v. Snead, 3 Ariz. 195, 24 Pac. 324; DeWitt v. Berry, 134 U. S. 306, 33 L. ed. 896, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 536; Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating Mach. Co. 141 U. S. 510, 35 L. ed. 837, 12 Sup. Ct. Rep. 46; Wilson v. New United States Cattle Ranch Co. 20 C. C. A. 244, 36 U. S. App. 634, 73 Fed. 994; Sanford v. Gates, T. & Co. 21 Mont. 277, 53 Pac. 749; Gaffney Mercantile Co. v. Hopkins, 21 Mont. 13, 52 Pac. 561; Fisher v. Briscoe, 10 Mont. 130, 25 Pac. 30 Western Electric Co. v. Baer-thel, 127 Iowa, 467, 103 N. W. 475 Dicbold Safe & Lock Co. v. Hus ton, 55 Kan. 104, 28 L.R.A. 53, 39 Pac. 1035 Miller v. Municipal Electric Lighting & P. Co. 133 Mo. 205, 34 S. W. 585 McCray Refrig erator & Cold Storage Co. v. Woods, 99 Mich. 269, 41 Am. St. Rep. 599, 58 N. W. 320; Gardiner v. McDonogh, 147 Cal. 313, 81 Pac. 964 Johnson v. Oppenheim, 55 N. Y. 280 Engelhorn v. Reitlinger, 122 N. Y. 81, 9 L.R.A. 549, 25 N. E. 297; Uihlein v. Matthews, 172 N. Y. 154, 64 N. E. 792 Finnigan v. Shaw, 184 Mass. 112, 68 N. E. 35. If plaintiff suffered any damage, there is no evidence in the record from which the same can be determined. The evidence does not dis close the cause, nature, or origin of the alleged loss of profits which is sought to be recovered here. Any attempted computation thereof would be conjectural and speculative. North Star Trading Co. v. Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition, 68 Wash. 457, 123 Pac. 605 Des-landes v. Scales, 187 Ala. 25, 65 So. 393 Hedrick v. Smith, — Tex. Civ. App. —, 146 S. W. 305 Silurian Mineral Springs Co. v. Kuhn, 65 Neb. 646, 91 N. W. 508 Beck v. West & Co. 87 Ala. 213, 6 So. 70 Winston Cigarette Mach. Co. v. Wells Whitehead Tobacco Co. 141 N. C. 284, 8 L.R.A.(N.S.) 255, 53 S. E. 885; Griffin v. Colver, 16 N. Y. 489, 69 Am. Dec. 718 Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. v. Thomas, 70 Kan. 409, 78 Pac. 861 Smuggler-Union Min. Co. v. Kent, 47 Colo. 320, 112 Pac. 223 Lane v. Storke, 10 Cal. App. 347, 101 Pac. 937 Merritt v. Adams County Land & Invest. Co. 29 N- D. 496, 151 N. W. 11. Robinson, J. : The plaintiff brings suit to recover $500 damages for the alleged failure of defendant to observe a written concession giving