Malewsky v. Simbol

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Malewsky v. Simbol

2 N.J. Misc. 430, 1924 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 167

DecidedMay 26, 1924

StatusPublished

This text of 2 N.J. Misc. 430 (Malewsky v. Simbol) 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

Malewsky v. Simbol, 2 N.J. Misc. 430, 1924 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 167 (N.J. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

The trial in this case resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff for $2,500. The defendant obtained a rule to show cause. The suit was to recover damages for personal injuries, by being 'struck by an automobile, in the early morning of September 17th, 1923, while the plaintiff was walking on the public highway toward Jersey City, a short distance after [431]*431leaving the Hackensack river bridge. The meritorious question involved is one of fact, which was properly submitted 'to the jury for determination. There is no merit in the other reasons, except one, viz.: The damages awarded are excessive. Our reading of the testimony leads us to the conclusion that the verdict is excessive and should be reduced to $1,500. If the plaintiff will remit the excess within ten clays the judgment may stand for $1,500, otherwise the rule to show cause will be made absolute.

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

Pee Cueiam.

The trial in this case resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff for $2,500. The defendant obtained a rule to show cause. The suit was to recover damages for personal injuries, by being 'struck by an automobile, in the early morning of September 17th, 1923, while the plaintiff was walking on the public highway toward Jersey City, a short distance after [431]*431leaving the Hackensack river bridge. The meritorious question involved is one of fact, which was properly submitted 'to the jury for determination. There is no merit in the other reasons, except one, viz.: The damages awarded are excessive. Our reading of the testimony leads us to the conclusion that the verdict is excessive and should be reduced to $1,500. If the plaintiff will remit the excess within ten clays the judgment may stand for $1,500, otherwise the rule to show cause will be made absolute.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 N.J. Misc. 430, 1924 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/malewsky-v-simbol-nj-1924.