Legal Opinion

Owens v. Cerullo

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided July 2, 1931PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pee Cubiam.

This action was instituted by the plaintiff to recover damages for injuries and loss sustained as a result of the alleged negligence of the defendants. The trial resulted in a general verdict against the defendants Eichard New, Max Sollonek, Sr., and Max Sollonek, Jr., for $15,000, and a verdict of no cause of action in favor of defendant Arthur Cerullo. Each defendant against whom the verdict went obtained a rule to show cause why the verdict should not be set aside.

The testimony produced by the plaintiff at the trial tended to show the following matters of fact:

On November 7th,…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hawkes v. GollAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939
  2. MONTREY v. PETER J. SCHWEITZER, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1952
  3. Ristan v. FrantzenNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1953
  4. Cameron & Poulos v. LockhartWyoming Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Cameron & Poulos v. LockhartWyoming Supreme Court · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API