Loughney v. Thomas
This text of 196 A. 460 (Loughney v. Thomas) 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.
Opinion
This case was tried at the Morris Circuit and resulted in a verdict of no cause of action. Plaintiff’s attorney obtained and argued a rule to show cause why the verdict should not be set aside and reserved no points of exception. Appellant insists, as in Gormley v. Gasiorowski, 110 N. J. L. 287, that the action of the trial judge is appealable if there has been an abuse of discretion. Gaffney v. Illingsworth, 90 Id. 490; Robinson v. Payne, 99 Id. 135, 142, and Diamond Rubber Co. v. Feldstein, 112 Id. 514. Trovato v. Capozzi, 119 Id. 149, assumes that there may be a right of appeal in cases where an abuse of discretion appears. The record in this case carefully examined is indicative of no abuse of discretion in the denial of the appellant’s motion for a new trial.
The judgment under review will be affirmed, with costs.
For affirmance — The Chanoelloe, Chief Justice, Paekeb, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Dongbs, Heheb, Pebskib, Deae,. Wells, WolfsKbil, Raffeety, JJ. 13.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
196 A. 460, 119 N.J.L. 341, 1938 N.J. LEXIS 271, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loughney-v-thomas-nj-1938.