Bagnato v. Spencer, White & Prentis, Inc.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Bagnato v. Spencer, White & Prentis, Inc.

46 A.2d 60, 134 N.J.L. 107, 1946 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 180

DecidedMarch 13, 1946

StatusPublished

This text of 46 A.2d 60 (Bagnato v. Spencer, White & Prentis, Inc.) 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

Bagnato v. Spencer, White & Prentis, Inc., 46 A.2d 60, 134 N.J.L. 107, 1946 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 180 (N.J. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Bodine, J.

This is a workmen’s compensation case. It was found in the Burean that the prosecutor of this writ had not established his right to compensation. The action of the Bureau was affirmed in the Court of Common Pleas. Mr. Justice Parker refused the writ. The court en banc awarded certiorari.

The basis of the award was that it was a debatable question whether the Deputy Commissioner acted arbitrarily in denying the employee’s attorney’s motion for a continuance of the hearing in order to afford him an opportunity to produce the testimony of the defendant’s physicians who had examined the claimant on the day of the alleged accident.

Yo depositions were taken which would enable us to determine whether the action was arbitrary. There was a bare denial of the continuance. If depositions had been taken on the writ, as they might, we could then determine whether the prosecutor could have established his cause of action if continuance had been granted. Since none were taken, we must assume the facts could not have been established as required by law.

The writ is dismissed, with costs.

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