Pitchenick v. New York Folding Box Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Pitchenick v. New York Folding Box Co.

30 A.2d 40, 129 N.J.L. 399, 1943 N.J. LEXIS 196

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 22, 1943·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The Compensation Bureau concluded that the evidence did not establish that the deceased employee’s death resulted from an accident which arose out of and in the course of his employment within the intendment of R. S. 1937, 34:15-7, et seq.; and the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment. The majority view was that, while there was evidence tending to show that decedent “was at the time on his way to call on a customer so that if he was killed accidentally,” his widow was entitled to recover, the proofs were persuasive that the death was suicidal.

Appellant contends that the evidence fails utterly to support this conclusion. We are not at liberty on error to weigh the evidence. The rule is that on certiorari findings of fact on conflicting evidence, or on uneontroverted evidence reasonably susceptible of conflicting inferences, are conclusive in this court. Ford Motor Co. v. Fernandez, 114 N. J. L. 202.

The judgment is accordingly affirmed.

For affirmance —The Chancellor,, Chief Justice, Parker, Case, Donges, Heher, Colie, Dear, Wells, Rafferty, Hague, Thompson, JJ. 12.

For reversal —None.

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

Per Curiam.

The Compensation Bureau concluded that the evidence did not establish that the deceased employee’s death resulted from an accident which arose out of and in the course of his employment within the intendment of R. S. 1937, 34:15-7, et seq.; and the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment. The majority view was that, while there was evidence tending to show that decedent “was at the time on his way to call on a customer so that if he was killed accidentally,” his widow was entitled to recover, the proofs were persuasive that the death was suicidal.

Appellant contends that the evidence fails utterly to support this conclusion. We are not at liberty on error to weigh the evidence. The rule is that on certiorari findings of fact on conflicting evidence, or on uneontroverted evidence reasonably susceptible of conflicting inferences, are conclusive in this court. Ford Motor Co. v. Fernandez, 114 N. J. L. 202.

The judgment is accordingly affirmed.

For affirmance —The Chancellor,, Chief Justice, Parker, Case, Donges, Heher, Colie, Dear, Wells, Rafferty, Hague, Thompson, JJ. 12.

For reversal —None.

Pitchenick v. New York Folding Box Co., 30 A.2d 40, 129 N.J.L. 399, 1943 N.J. LEXIS 196 (N.J. 1943).

Pincite

30 A.2d 40 (Pitchenick v. New York Folding Box Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related