Puorro v. Salerno
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Trenchard, J.
The sole contention of the defendant-appellant is that the plaintiff’s judgment should be reversed because the trial judge denied a motion to nonsuit based upon the ground of contributory negligence.
We think the judge was right.
Of course on defendant’s motion to nonsuit the judge was bound to take as true the plaintiff’s evidence. Andre v. Mertens, 88 N. J. L. 626. That evidence tended to show the following matters of fact:
On Sunday, December 15th, 1929, at ten-fifteen A. m., the plaintiff, Joseph Puorro, about fifty-seven years old, was…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hempel v. HallCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1920
- Courviosier v. BurgerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
- Rochford v. StankewiczSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1932
3Cited by4 opinions
- De Rossett v. MaloneCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1950
- Gable v. FieldWashington Supreme Court · 1937
- Conroy v. PurcaroSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1964
- Ackley ex rel. Ackley v. HannawackerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1934