Lee v. North Jersey Street Railway Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Lee v. North Jersey Street Railway Co.

49 A. 528, 66 N.J.L. 336, 1901 N.J. LEXIS 107

DecidedJune 17, 1901

StatusPublished

This text of 49 A. 528 (Lee v. North Jersey Street Railway 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

Lee v. North Jersey Street Railway Co., 49 A. 528, 66 N.J.L. 336, 1901 N.J. LEXIS 107 (N.J. 1901).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The only assignments of error are directed to the refusal of the trial court to nonsuit at the conclusion of the plaintiff’s ease, and to direct a verdict for defendant when all the evidence was in.

The bills of exception upon which the assignments of error are based disclose evidence of the negligence of the motorman [337]*337who was running the trolley car which collided with the vehicle plaintiff was driving, proper to be submitted to the jury. While the proof that plaintiff contributed to the collision by his own negligence was of considerable weight, it was encountered by contradictory evidence. Upon the whole evidence, the question whether plaintiff exercised the required care was properly submitted to the jury.

No error in these respects being discoverable, the judgment must be affirmed.

For 'affirmance — The Chancellor, Dixon, Garrison, Gummere, Collins, Port, Hendrickson, Bogert, Adams, Yredenburgh, Yoorhees, Yroom. 12.

For reversal — None.

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

Per Curiam.

The only assignments of error are directed to the refusal of the trial court to nonsuit at the conclusion of the plaintiff’s ease, and to direct a verdict for defendant when all the evidence was in.

The bills of exception upon which the assignments of error are based disclose evidence of the negligence of the motorman [337]*337who was running the trolley car which collided with the vehicle plaintiff was driving, proper to be submitted to the jury. While the proof that plaintiff contributed to the collision by his own negligence was of considerable weight, it was encountered by contradictory evidence. Upon the whole evidence, the question whether plaintiff exercised the required care was properly submitted to the jury.

No error in these respects being discoverable, the judgment must be affirmed.

For 'affirmance — The Chancellor, Dixon, Garrison, Gummere, Collins, Port, Hendrickson, Bogert, Adams, Yredenburgh, Yoorhees, Yroom. 12.

For reversal — None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A. 528, 66 N.J.L. 336, 1901 N.J. LEXIS 107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-v-north-jersey-street-railway-co-nj-1901.