From our private database of 35,800+ case briefs...
Rombola v. Cosindas
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
220 N.E.2d 919 (1966)
Facts
Peter Cosindas (defendant) owned a race horse. Paul Rombola (plaintiff) was an experienced horse trainer and racer. In return for a share of the horse’s winnings, Rombola contracted to train, maintain, and race the horse in 31 races scheduled for the spring, summer, and fall of 1963. The horse did well in 25 spring and summer races, earning $12,000 for Cosindas and Rombola. However, without Rombola’s prior knowledge or approval, Cosindas took possession of the horse, thereby preventing its entry in the remaining six races scheduled for the fall. Rombola sued Cosindas to recover his share of what the horse could have won had it entered the six races. In his opening statement, Rombola said that he could estimate those lost winnings based on his expertise, the horse’s 1963 spring and summer winnings, and the horse’s similar track record in 1964. After hearing Rombola’s opening statement, the trial judge directed the jury’s verdict for Cosindas. Rombola appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kirk, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 620,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,800 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
