Tarburton v. Hagemann

187 A. 749, 117 N.J.L. 294, 1936 N.J. LEXIS 362
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided October 20, 1936·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The proofs examined, it clearly appears that a factual question arose as to whether the plaintiff was an invitee at the time of his injuries. This factual question was submitted to the jury by the learned trial judge in a fair and well balanced charge. Timannus v. DeWitt, 109 N. J. L. 168.

The judgment under review is affirmed.

For affirmance — -The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Heher, Perskie, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Cole, JJ. 15.

For reversal — None.

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

Tarburton v. Hagemann, 187 A. 749, 117 N.J.L. 294, 1936 N.J. LEXIS 362 (N.J. 1936).

187 A. 749 (Tarburton v. Hagemann) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.