
    JOSEPH WHITMORE, Respondent, v. CHARLES BISCHOFF, Appellant.
    
      Bddenee — opinion of witness — Nuisance — measure of damages.
    
    In an action brought to recover damages for a nuisance maintained by the defendant, plaintiff was, against the objection and exception of defendant’s counsel, allowed to express his opinion as to the pecuniary amount of damages which his property had sustained by reason of the nuisance. Held, that this was error. The proper way is to lay such facts, as bear upon the question of damages, before the jury, and leave them to fix the amount. ' (Teerpenning v. The Oorn Bx. Ins. do.-, 48 N. Y., 279 ; Morehouse v. Mathews, 2 id., 514.)
    All the damages which a party can recover for a private nuisance, are those which he has sustained previous to the bringing of the action. It is error to allow a recovery fbr the diminution in value of the premises, based upon the assumption that the nuisance is to continue forever. (Brands v. Behoellleopf, 53 N. Y., 152 ; MeKeon v. Bee, 4 Eobt., 449; affirmed, 51 ÍT. Y., 300.)
    Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered upon the verdict of a jury.
    This action was brought to recover the damages arising from an alleged nuisance claimed to have been committed by the defendant, a brewer, by the discharge, through a sewer or drain, of certain offensive matter from his premises, into a brook or water-course running through the land of the plaintiff.
    
      Westervelt <& Greenfield, for appellant. Wm. Henry Anthon, for respondent.
   Opinion by

Taloott, J. •

Present — Baenaed, P. J., Tappen and Talcott, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide the event.  