Andes v. Mason

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Andes v. Mason

147 A. 912, 7 N.J. Misc. 933, 1929 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 89

DecidedNovember 4, 1929

StatusPublished

This text of 147 A. 912 (Andes v. Mason) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Andes v. Mason, 147 A. 912, 7 N.J. Misc. 933, 1929 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 89 (N.J. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff brought suit to recover compensation for injuries received by her in a collision which occurred between [934]*934her car, which she was driving, and the car of the defendant. The trial resulted in an award in her favor in the sum of $8,500.

The first ground upon which we are asked to make this rule absolute is that the finding of the jury that the accident resulted solely through the carelessness of the defendant is contrary to the clear weight of evidence. Our examination -of the proofs satisfies us that this contention is not substantial.

It is further contended that the award of $8,500 is excessive. We think it is plainly so. If plaintiff will consent to a reduction of the verdict to the sum of $5,000, the rule to show cause will he discharged; otherwise, it will be made absolute.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff brought suit to recover compensation for injuries received by her in a collision which occurred between [934]*934her car, which she was driving, and the car of the defendant. The trial resulted in an award in her favor in the sum of $8,500.

The first ground upon which we are asked to make this rule absolute is that the finding of the jury that the accident resulted solely through the carelessness of the defendant is contrary to the clear weight of evidence. Our examination -of the proofs satisfies us that this contention is not substantial.

It is further contended that the award of $8,500 is excessive. We think it is plainly so. If plaintiff will consent to a reduction of the verdict to the sum of $5,000, the rule to show cause will he discharged; otherwise, it will be made absolute.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

147 A. 912, 7 N.J. Misc. 933, 1929 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 89, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/andes-v-mason-nj-1929.