Legal Opinion

Spencer v. Haines

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided February 26, 1906PublishedCited by 4 opinions

On'application for a. venire de novo.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Reed, J.

This motion is made on the coming in of the postea, and the insistence by the counsel for the plaintiff is that the verdict is so imperfect that no judgment can be entered upon it.

From the postea it appears that the action was brought to recover damages arising from an injury to one Lizzie Spencer, a married woman, which injury was caused by a machine in the laundry of the defendant. The counsel for the plaint*326iff, talcing advantage of the provisions of section 21 of the Practice act (Pamph. L. 1903, p. 540), added to the claim of the wife in…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Bouvier v. Baltimore & New York RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1900

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Poland v. ParsekianNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1963
  2. Haines v. SpencerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1909
  3. Navarro v. MartinUnited States District Court · 1944
  4. O'Carroll v. StarkSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1914

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API