Jorgensen v. Wilberg

139 A. 904, 6 N.J. Misc. 79, 1928 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 423
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 18, 1928·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The only reason urged for making this rule absolute is that the damages are claimed to be excessive. At the trial there seems to have been an issue of fact as to whether a [80] young boy of thirteen who was killed because of being run down by an automobile had been struck by the defendant’s ear. That issue is not pressed now. Hence, it may be considered as settled that the defendant’s car, driven by the defendant, ran down the boy and inflicted injuries resulting in his death. The verdict was for $6,000. The evidence shows that the bo}7 was thirteen years old, in excellent health, and of good mental ability. He left a father and mother and twelve brothers and sisters, all living, the oldest being twenty-four years old and the youngest about five months old. We are unable to say that in view of the reduced purchasing power of money this verdict is excessive.

The rule to show cause will, accordingly, be discharged.

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

Jorgensen v. Wilberg, 139 A. 904, 6 N.J. Misc. 79, 1928 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 423 (N.J. 1928).

139 A. 904 (Jorgensen v. Wilberg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McStay v. Przychocki
74 A.2d 370 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1950)
Scott-Huntington v. Pearson
168 A. 259 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1933)
Sakos v. Byers
168 A. 222 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1933)
Zannelle v. Pettine
155 A. 236 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1931)