Swiencicki v. Wieczerzak

140 A. 248, 6 N.J. Misc. 145, 1928 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 404
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedJanuary 31, 1928
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 140 A. 248 (Swiencicki v. Wieczerzak) 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
Swiencicki v. Wieczerzak, 140 A. 248, 6 N.J. Misc. 145, 1928 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 404 (N.J. 1928).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The declaration in this case consists of two counts. In the first count it is alleged that on the 18th day of October, 1925, the defendant, in the premises at No. 240 Wallington avenue, Wallington, New Jersey, did commit an outrageous assault [146]*146and battery upon the plaintiff Mary Swiencicki, wife of the plaintiff Frank Swiencicki. In the second count it is alleged that the husband plaintiff Frank Swiencicki lost, and is deprived, and will be deprived, of the comfort, association and assistance of his wife; that he has expended sums of money for medicináis, medical aid, treatment and attention to his wife, and that he has expended divers sums of money in order to hire and engage help to assist in household duties.

The trial resulted in two verdicts, one of no cause of action in favor of Frank Wieczerzak and against Frank Swiencicki and another in the sum of twelve hundred dollars ($1,200) in favor of the plaintiff Mary Swiencicki and against the defendant, Frank Wieczerzak. The defendant obtained a rule to show cause and writes down seven reasons for a new trial. Only one need be noticed, viz., the fourth. These two verdicts are absolutely irreconcilable. For this reason the rule will be made absolute under the case of Lanning v. Trenton, &c., Traction Co., 130 Atl. Rep. 444. That case is directly in point. For this reason 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

Related

Guinn Ex Rel. Guinn v. Millard Truck Lines, Inc.
134 N.W.2d 549 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1965)
VIRGINIA CHANCE v. Lawry's, Inc.
374 P.2d 185 (California Supreme Court, 1962)
Berry v. Foster
287 S.W.2d 16 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1955)
Brendel v. Public Service Elec. and Gas Co.
101 A.2d 56 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1953)
Hill v. Wilson
224 S.W.2d 797 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1949)
Lansburgh & Bro. v. Clark
127 F.2d 331 (D.C. Circuit, 1942)
Rich v. Central Electrotype Foundry Co.
3 A.2d 584 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1939)
Ruby v. Quotidian
183 A. 910 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
140 A. 248, 6 N.J. Misc. 145, 1928 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 404, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swiencicki-v-wieczerzak-nj-1928.