
    Henderson v. McReynolds.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.
    
    May 11, 1891.)
    False Imprisonment—Nominal Damages—New Trial.
    In an action for false imprisonment, it appeared that plaintiff was arrested and detained only long enough to walk across the street. Held, that a verdict for six cents damages should not be set aside as inadequate, and a new trial granted.
    Appeal from circuit court, Westchester county.
    Action by Henry 0. Henderson against William McReynolds for false imprisonment. A verdict for plaintiff for six cents damages was set aside as inadequate, and defendant appeals.
    
      Argued before Barnard, P. T., and Pratt, J.
    
      Jacob S. Van Wyck, for appellant. Louis J. Grant, for respondent. •
   Pratt, J.

This was an action of false imprisonment, tried before a jury, who assessed the damages at six cents, which verdict was set aside as inadequate. The judge charged the jury that, at most, the detention was only a technical arrest, and that' the measure of damages was entirely within their discretion. This was right, as the evidence showed that plaintiff was arrested and detained only long enough to walk across the street, and the verdict was consistent with the charge. There was no basis-for any specific sum as damages, and, the jury having estimated the same as nominal, it was not proper for the court to interfere. Indeed, it is not clear that a verdict for the defendant would not have been justified.- We think it is clear that the case is one where a verdict cannot be properly interfered with. Order reversed, with costs.  