History
  • No items yet
midpage
Lewis v. M. & v. Motor Co.
106 N.J.L. 572
| N.J. | 1930
|
Check Treatment

There is a mistake of fact in the per curiam of the Supreme Court, which states that verdicts were awarded to the plaintiff Esther Lewis for personal injuries, and to her husband, Franklin Lewis, for loss of services and expense of curing his wife. On the contrary the suits were for loss of the car and other personal property.

With the exception just mentioned the judgments under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Supreme Court.

For affirmance — THE CHANCELLOR, CHIEF JUSTICE, PARKER, BLACK, CAMPBELL, CASE, BODINE, VAN BUSKIRK, McGLENNON, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None. *Page 573

Case Details

Case Name: Lewis v. M. & v. Motor Co.
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Date Published: May 19, 1930
Citation: 106 N.J.L. 572
Court Abbreviation: N.J.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.