
    BAGLEY v. STERN.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    February 28, 1905.)
    Actions—Unliquidated Damages—Interest.
    Where plaintiff sued to recover unliquidated damages, it was error to permit the jury to allow interest thereon.
    [Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 29, Cent. Dig. Interest, §§ 35-40.]
    Appeal from City Court of New York, Trial' Term.
    Action by H. Watts Bagley against Louis Stern. From a City Court judgment in favor of plaintiff and from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial, he appeals. Reversed.
    Argued before SCOTT, GIEGERICH, and McCALL, JJ.
    Fleischman & Fox, for appellant.
    Isaac & Jacob Fromme, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

Under the judge’s charge the jury were allowed to include interest in the amount they found due. Since the action was for unliquidated damages, this was error. It is impossible to say from the verdict that the jury did not allow interest, and the judgment must therefore be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.  