Summary
In Hoppe v. Russo-Asiatic Bank (235 N.Y. 37) the court stated, per curiam: "In an action properly brought in the courts of this State by a citizen or an alien to recover damages, liquidated or unliquidated, for breach of contract or for a tort, where primarily the plaintiff is entitled to recover a sum expressed in foreign money, in determining the amount of the judgment expressed in our currency the rate of exchange prevailing at the date of the breach of contract or at the date of the commission of the tort is under ordinary circumstances to be applied."
Summary of this case from Kantor v. Aristo Hosiery Co., Inc.Opinion
Argued January 16, 1923
Decided January 30, 1923
Joseph H. Choate, Jr., and Maurice Leon for appellant.
Joseph M. Hartfield and Vermont Hatch for respondent.
The judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.
Held: In an action properly brought in the courts of this state by a citizen or an alien to recover damages, liquidated or unliquidated, for breach of contract or for a tort, where primarily the plaintiff is entitled to recover a sum expressed in foreign money, in determining the amount of the judgment expressed in our currency the rate of exchange prevailing at the date of the breach of contract or at the date of the commission of the tort is under ordinary circumstances to be applied. ( Gross v. Mendel, 171 App. Div. 237; affd., 225 N.Y. 633.)
HISCOCK, Ch. J., HOGAN, CARDOZO, POUND, McLAUGHLIN, CRANE and ANDREWS, JJ., concur.
Judgment affirmed.