Lorenzo v. Public Service Coordinated Transport

Third Circuit

Lorenzo v. Public Service Coordinated Transport

283 F.2d 947

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedNovember 30, 1960

DocketNo. 13266

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 283 F.2d 947 (Lorenzo v. Public Service Coordinated Transport) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lorenzo v. Public Service Coordinated Transport, 283 F.2d 947 (3d Cir. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff in a personal injury case. Jurisdiction is based on diversity. The operative facts occurred in New Jersey and that State’s law governs so far as substantive tort law is concerned.

The case presented the question whether the driver of the defendant’s bus failed in his duty of care when the bus collided with an approaching motor car which cut across the median strip of the New Jersey Turnpike and shot across the opposite lane at high speed. The jury, guided by careful interrogatories from the trial judge, answered the question in the plaintiff’s favor. The question is not whether the Court would have given the same verdict as the jury but whether there was before that body evidence on which its finding can be based. The trial judge thought so and we do also.

Numerous errors in the conduct of the trial are complained of but we think that they are not sufficiently substantial to cause the verdict to be set aside.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff in a personal injury case. Jurisdiction is based on diversity. The operative facts occurred in New Jersey and that State’s law governs so far as substantive tort law is concerned.

The case presented the question whether the driver of the defendant’s bus failed in his duty of care when the bus collided with an approaching motor car which cut across the median strip of the New Jersey Turnpike and shot across the opposite lane at high speed. The jury, guided by careful interrogatories from the trial judge, answered the question in the plaintiff’s favor. The question is not whether the Court would have given the same verdict as the jury but whether there was before that body evidence on which its finding can be based. The trial judge thought so and we do also.

Numerous errors in the conduct of the trial are complained of but we think that they are not sufficiently substantial to cause the verdict to be set aside.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 F.2d 947, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lorenzo-v-public-service-coordinated-transport-ca3-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack