Roome v. Jennings — 60 N.Y. St. Rep. 842

Majority

p. 842

William R. Roome et al., App’lts, v. Frederick C. Jennings et al., Resp’ts.

(New York City Court, General Term,

Filed June 20, 1894.)

Headnote

Fbaud—Damage.

The mere suppression of the truth upon a purchase of goods does not create a cause of action, unless injury ensue therefrom.

Conceding that the defendants concealed the fact that they were the purchasers of the teas in question, that mere suppression of the trutli does not give the plaintiffs a cause of action unless they were injured thereby. The testimony even of the plaintiffs show that they suffered no damage, because on the 16th or 17th of February when defendants declared that they were the purchasers, they also declared that they would pay the contract price for said teas upon their delivery to them. But plaintiffs refused to deliver and elected to terminate the contract, and if they suffered damage, they so suffer because of their own act, and therefore cannot complain or claim against defendants any damage. For the reason assigned by the trial justice and the foregoing, the complaint was rightfully dismissed.

Judgment is affirmed with costs.

Conlan, J., concurs; ISTewburger, J., concurs in result.