Dunn v. Edwards Construction Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Dunn v. Edwards Construction Co.

137 A. 922, 5 N.J. Misc. 584, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 167

DecidedMay 26, 1927

StatusPublished

This text of 137 A. 922 (Dunn v. Edwards Construction Co.) 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

Dunn v. Edwards Construction Co., 137 A. 922, 5 N.J. Misc. 584, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 167 (N.J. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The writ removes a judgment of the Hudson Common Pleas modifying an award of the workmen’s compensation bureau by increasing the award of the latter tribunal from seven and one-half per cent, to twenty-five per cent, as compensation for temporary and permanent disability suffered by the petitioner as the result of an accident arising out of and in the course of petitioner’s employment by the defendant while engaged in the erection of the structure finally completed upon what is known as “Boyle’s Thirty Acres,” in Jersey City.

An examination of the testimony presented to the Common Pleas, together with the briefs submitted by respective counsel, leads me to the conclusion that the Court of Common Pleas had before it sufficient testimony to warrant the increased award. The judgment of the Common Pleas will therefore be affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

The writ removes a judgment of the Hudson Common Pleas modifying an award of the workmen’s compensation bureau by increasing the award of the latter tribunal from seven and one-half per cent, to twenty-five per cent, as compensation for temporary and permanent disability suffered by the petitioner as the result of an accident arising out of and in the course of petitioner’s employment by the defendant while engaged in the erection of the structure finally completed upon what is known as “Boyle’s Thirty Acres,” in Jersey City.

An examination of the testimony presented to the Common Pleas, together with the briefs submitted by respective counsel, leads me to the conclusion that the Court of Common Pleas had before it sufficient testimony to warrant the increased award. The judgment of the Common Pleas will therefore be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 A. 922, 5 N.J. Misc. 584, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunn-v-edwards-construction-co-nj-1927.