Downs v. Curran

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Downs v. Curran

139 A. 317, 5 N.J. Misc. 947, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 66

DecidedOctober 27, 1927

StatusPublished

This text of 139 A. 317 (Downs v. Curran) 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

Downs v. Curran, 139 A. 317, 5 N.J. Misc. 947, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 66 (N.J. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This suit was brought to recover damages for personal injuries. The plaintiff, who was nearly four years old, on May 1st, 1924, while crossing Main street, in Wharton, New Jersey, was struck and injured by an automobile driven by Robert F. Oram. Robert F. Oram died leaving the defendants his devisees and legatees.

The trial resulted in a verdict for the defendants.

The plaintiff obtained a rule to show cause and writes down five reasons for a new trial. Our reading of the record and a consideration of the arguments of the respective counsel lead us to the conclusion that the points involved are pure questions of fact. We find no sufficient reason for disturbing the verdict of the jury.

The rule to show cause is therefore discharged.

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

Per Curiam.

This suit was brought to recover damages for personal injuries. The plaintiff, who was nearly four years old, on May 1st, 1924, while crossing Main street, in Wharton, New Jersey, was struck and injured by an automobile driven by Robert F. Oram. Robert F. Oram died leaving the defendants his devisees and legatees.

The trial resulted in a verdict for the defendants.

The plaintiff obtained a rule to show cause and writes down five reasons for a new trial. Our reading of the record and a consideration of the arguments of the respective counsel lead us to the conclusion that the points involved are pure questions of fact. We find no sufficient reason for disturbing the verdict of the jury.

The rule to show cause is therefore discharged.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 A. 317, 5 N.J. Misc. 947, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 66, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/downs-v-curran-nj-1927.