Watt v.
Nevada Central R.R.
23
Facts: The defendant’s locomotive set fire to the plaintiff’s
hay stack and hay press. The plaintiff
sued for the market value of the hay destroyed, even though he only needed the
hay for cattle feed in case of a severe winter.
The trial court awarded damages to the plaintiff equal to the market
value of the hay. The defendant
appealed.
Issue: To what damages is the plaintiff entitled if he had
no plans to replace the goods that were destroyed?
Rule: The plaintiff shall not be placed into a better
position than if the negligence had not occurred.
Analysis: The court reasons that since the hay had no use as
feed, it was unsure whether or not it had any future use. Therefore, there’s no way to calculate the
damages due for that hay. It is deemed
important that the plaintiff did not avail himself of the opportunity to
purchase hay in
Conclusion: The appellate court reduced the damages to the
difference between the total market value of the hay and the total baling and transportation
costs, plus the cost of replacing the hay press that
was destroyed.