Henggler v. Cohn

52 A. 280, 68 N.J.L. 240, 39 Vroom 240, 1902 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 130
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided June 9, 1902·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The nonsuit in this case was properly directed. The cause of the accident was the breaking of a hinge which connected two parts' of a ladder together. Assuming the fact to be, as plaintiff contended, that the hinge was unsafe, and the ladder dangerous -on this account, this condition would have been perfectly obvious to the plaintiff upon inspection, unless it was due to a latent defect, which the master himself could not have ascertained by an inspection on his part.

[241] We do not think that the evidence taken subsequent to the trial, upon rule,, is newly-discovered evidence within the meaning of that term. We have, however, examined it, and do not think it would justify the direction of a new trial.-

The rule to show cause is discharged.

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

Henggler v. Cohn, 52 A. 280, 68 N.J.L. 240, 39 Vroom 240, 1902 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 130 (N.J. 1902).

52 A. 280 (Henggler v. Cohn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Etel v. Grubb
288 P. 931 (Washington Supreme Court, 1930)
Snyder v. J. S. Rogers Co.
55 A. 303 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1903)