Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court And, at Law, in the Court of Errors and Appeals of the State of New Jersey, Volume 81Soney and Sage, 1912 |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 100
Page 7
... judgment under review will be affirmed . HARRY N. TAYLOR v . MARY A. THORNTON . Submitted December 1 , 1910 - Decided March 23 , 1911 . 1. A judgment entered upon the report of a referee is not open to attack upon the ground that the ...
... judgment under review will be affirmed . HARRY N. TAYLOR v . MARY A. THORNTON . Submitted December 1 , 1910 - Decided March 23 , 1911 . 1. A judgment entered upon the report of a referee is not open to attack upon the ground that the ...
Page 8
... judgment was entered thereon in favor of Taylor and against Thornton . The latter now attacks the validity of the judgment ; and her first assignment is that the judgment should be reversed because the referee was not sworn according to ...
... judgment was entered thereon in favor of Taylor and against Thornton . The latter now attacks the validity of the judgment ; and her first assignment is that the judgment should be reversed because the referee was not sworn according to ...
Page 9
... judgment to be entered upon it . It is the qualification of the referee . Id . 86 . now too late to challenge Hoboken v . Laverty , 31 Hoboken v . It is further assigned for error that the Circuit Court im- properly directed a reference ...
... judgment to be entered upon it . It is the qualification of the referee . Id . 86 . now too late to challenge Hoboken v . Laverty , 31 Hoboken v . It is further assigned for error that the Circuit Court im- properly directed a reference ...
Page 37
... judgment in favor of defendant upon the grounds that there was not shown any legal liability upon the part of the defendant , also that the motorman , by his own carelessness , caused the injury he received . Judgment for defendant of ...
... judgment in favor of defendant upon the grounds that there was not shown any legal liability upon the part of the defendant , also that the motorman , by his own carelessness , caused the injury he received . Judgment for defendant of ...
Page 40
... judgment of the District Court of the city of Trenton is reversed and a venire de novo awarded . CLARENCE ROGERS v . THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL . Submitted December 1 , 1910 - Decided January 6 , 1911 . Under the supplement ...
... judgment of the District Court of the city of Trenton is reversed and a venire de novo awarded . CLARENCE ROGERS v . THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL . Submitted December 1 , 1910 - Decided January 6 , 1911 . Under the supplement ...
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
1911-Decided June 44 Vroom 52 Vroom action affirmed alleged amendment amount appears application assessment assigned Atlantic City BERGEN BOGERT bond cause Central Railroad certiorari charge CHIEF JUSTICE claim condition CONGDON construction contract contributory negligence council court was delivered crossing damages declaration defendant in error defendant's demurrer District Court duty election entitled Erie Railroad Co evidence fact feet fendant ground held injury Insurance Jersey City judgment jury land legislative legislature liability March 23 ment MINTURN mortgage Newark nonsuit notice objection opinion ordinance owner Pamph PARKER parties payment Pennsylvania Railroad person plaintiff in error plea present proof prosecutor Public Service Railway question railroad company Railway reason recover refused road statute street Supreme Court SWAYZE testimony thereof tion track TRENCHARD trial court trial judge verdict VOORHEES VREDENBURGH West Jersey writ of error