Ross v. Pennsylvania Railroad

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Ross v. Pennsylvania Railroad

146 A. 37, 7 N.J. Misc. 469, 1929 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 264

DecidedMay 7, 1929

StatusPublished

This text of 146 A. 37 (Ross v. Pennsylvania Railroad) 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

Ross v. Pennsylvania Railroad, 146 A. 37, 7 N.J. Misc. 469, 1929 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 264 (N.J. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Cükiam.

The plaintiff has a verdict for $25,000 for damages for the death of Christina Eoss, the mother of Thomas Eoss, Jr., who at the time of the death of his mother was about four years of age. He is her sole next of kin.

The single ground urged under this rule is that the verdict is excessive.

We think it is. If the plaintiff will consent to a reduction of the verdict to the sum of $15,000, it may stand for that amount, otherwise the rule to show cause will be made absolute and a venire de novo issue as to the question of damages only.

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

Pee Cükiam.

The plaintiff has a verdict for $25,000 for damages for the death of Christina Eoss, the mother of Thomas Eoss, Jr., who at the time of the death of his mother was about four years of age. He is her sole next of kin.

The single ground urged under this rule is that the verdict is excessive.

We think it is. If the plaintiff will consent to a reduction of the verdict to the sum of $15,000, it may stand for that amount, otherwise the rule to show cause will be made absolute and a venire de novo issue as to the question of damages only.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

146 A. 37, 7 N.J. Misc. 469, 1929 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ross-v-pennsylvania-railroad-nj-1929.