Legal Opinion

Jorgensen v. Wilberg

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided January 18, 1928PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

The only reason urged for making this rule absolute is that the damages are claimed to be excessive. At the trial there seems to have been an issue of fact as to whether a *80young boy of thirteen who was killed because of being run down by an automobile had been struck by the defendant’s ear. That issue is not pressed now. Hence, it may be considered as settled that the defendant’s car, driven by the defendant, ran down the boy and inflicted injuries resulting in his death. The verdict was for $6,000. The evidence shows that the bo}7 was thirteen years old, in excellent health, and of good…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. McStay v. PrzychockiNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1950
  2. Zannelle v. PettineSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1931
  3. Sakos v. ByersSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1933
  4. Scott-Huntington v. PearsonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API