Long v. Bergen County Court of Common Pleas and George Stettler

• Decision Date: 11 April 1913
• Citation: Long v. Bergen County Court of Common Pleas and George Stettler, 86 A. 529, 84 N.J.L. 117 (N.J. 1913)
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
• Parties: F.R. LONG, W.G. BROADHURST COMPANY, PROSECUTOR, v. BERGEN COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND GEORGE STETTLER

86 A. 529

84 N.J.L. 117

LONG et al.

v. BERGEN COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS et al.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

April 11, 1913.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Action by George Stettler against F. R Long and the W. G. Broadhurst Company.Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring certiorari.Reversed and remanded.

Argued before PARKER, J., at chambers.

Kalisch & Kalisch, of Newark (Isidor Kalisch, of Newark, on the brief), for prosecutors.

Addison Ely, Jr., of Rutherford, for defendant.

PARKER, J.The difficulty in upholding the judgment in this case arises from the absence of any finding of facts by the court of common pleas, from which the legality of the award by that court can be determined.

The statute does not require the evidence to be sent up; but it does require the "determination" of the pleas to "contain a statement of facts as determined by said judge."Section 2, subsec.20.No doubt this court, following the usual practice, would call for the evidence if a finding of fact were challenged as without any evidence to support it; but that is not necessary to consider at present.What is before me is a paper purporting to be the required statement of facts as determined by the judge, and which, after some formal recitals, reads as follows: "I do determine and find all of the facts alleged in the petition to be true, and I do further find the petitioner has received and is now suffering from a disability partial in character and permanent in quality, and on application of the petitioner and in the interest of justice I determine and find that the compensation should be commuted to a single lump sum; and I further determine and assess the damages of the petitioner at the sum of one thousand dollars, besides costs to be taxed."

This is not a statement of facts that can be used on review to test the propriety of the award.So far as appears on its face, the disability might range from the loss of part of a phalanx of the little finger to the loss of an entire arm or leg, or anything short of statutory total disability.Section 2, subsec.11 (c).We are not helped by the "finding" that the "facts alleged in the petition are true," for that paper, after describing the cause of the accident, says merely that it resulted in "dislocating his shoulder, knocking him senseless, causing great pain, spitting of blood, and inability to breathe without pain, and other external and internal bruises and injuries, whereby he was permanently injured."Further on it avers that, plaintiff"is still unable to perform work or labor, and has suffered and is suffering great pain, and is permanently injured."It is obvious that not one of the injuries described is necessarily permanent,...