Rapp v. Butler-Newark Bus Line, Inc.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Rapp v. Butler-Newark Bus Line, Inc.

137 A. 524, 5 N.J. Misc. 567, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 192

DecidedMay 17, 1927

StatusPublished

This text of 137 A. 524 (Rapp v. Butler-Newark Bus Line, Inc.) 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

Rapp v. Butler-Newark Bus Line, Inc., 137 A. 524, 5 N.J. Misc. 567, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 192 (N.J. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This suit was brought by Henrietta Eapp and her husband to recover compensation for injuries received by her while riding as a passenger in a jitney bus belonging to the defendant company, and also for the expenses incurred and loss of services sustained by her husband as the result of her injuries. The trial resulted in the rendering of a verdict in her favor for $3,350, and in favor of her husband for $750. Thereupon, the defendant company applied for and was allowed a rule to show cause why this verdict should not be set aside and a new trial granted. Upon the return thereof. Judge Dungan, after having heard the argument of counsel and having considered the merits of the application, discharged the rule. So far as the state of the case shows, no exceptions were reserved in the rule to show cause; and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the presumption is that there was no such reservation. This being the [568]*568situation, the defendant, by suing out the rule to show cause, waived his right of appeal. See Supreme Court rule No. 139.

Eor the reasons indicated, the appeal will be dismissed.

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

Per Curiam.

This suit was brought by Henrietta Eapp and her husband to recover compensation for injuries received by her while riding as a passenger in a jitney bus belonging to the defendant company, and also for the expenses incurred and loss of services sustained by her husband as the result of her injuries. The trial resulted in the rendering of a verdict in her favor for $3,350, and in favor of her husband for $750. Thereupon, the defendant company applied for and was allowed a rule to show cause why this verdict should not be set aside and a new trial granted. Upon the return thereof. Judge Dungan, after having heard the argument of counsel and having considered the merits of the application, discharged the rule. So far as the state of the case shows, no exceptions were reserved in the rule to show cause; and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the presumption is that there was no such reservation. This being the [568]*568situation, the defendant, by suing out the rule to show cause, waived his right of appeal. See Supreme Court rule No. 139.

Eor the reasons indicated, the appeal will be dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 A. 524, 5 N.J. Misc. 567, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 192, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rapp-v-butler-newark-bus-line-inc-nj-1927.