Wilson v. Kuhn

Decision Date07 October 1925
Docket NumberNo. 20.,20.
Citation130 A. 468
PartiesWILSON v. KUHN.
CourtNew Jersey Supreme Court

Action by Robert C. Wilson against Ferdinand Kuhn. Verdict for plaintiff. On defendant's rule to show cause. Rule discharged.

Argued March term, 1925, before the CHIEF JUSTICE, and PARKER and KATZENBACH, JJ.

Whiting & Moore, of Newark, for plaintiff.

Joseph C. Paul, of Newark, for defendant.

PER CURIAM. The plaintiff, while driving his motorcar, was severely injured by coming into collision with the motorcar of the defendant on the road between Morristown and Mendham. The accident occurred comparatively early in the morning. The defendant was a business man doing business in Passaic, and was on his way to business at the time. His car was a large Locomobile, driven by a hired chauffeur, and, according to the testimony of the plaintiff, was running about 50 miles an hour at the time of the accident. The Morristown-Mendham road runs substantially east and west. The plaintiff was employed on a private place situate on the south side of the road, and was driving northward out of the place so as to reach the Morristown-Mendham road. This private place was shut off from the road by a hedge about 3, 4, or 5 feet high, on top of a bank 2 to 3 feet high. There was a space of about 8 feet between the hedge and the concrete strip. The plaintiff's testimony does not seem to state what kind of a hedge it was, but the accident occurred on the 28th of January.

The plaintiff's story of the accident was substantially this: That it was a cold morning; that he was on low speed until he got to the top of a grade, and on reaching the top, shifted to second speed and proceeded in that speed until he got out in the road. He then testified as follows:

"As I approached the road I kept looking both ways. You can see through that hedge when you are back a distance from it and looking at it in right angle, or nearly a right angle. You can see through it. As you get closer to it and begin looking at it at a more oblique angle, you can't see through it, but I looked as much as I could, and, as I approached the road, I sounded my Lorn. * * *

"Q. How fast were you going at that time? A. Well; it is slightly down grade. This drive was a little bit down grade approaching the road, and as I neared the road, I threw off the power altogether; that is, I put my foot on the clutch, let the ear just drift down at the speed of, I should say, 6 to 8 miles an hour. * * * As I was back up the driveway I could see through the hedge for a short distance, and —but as you approach the lane, you come— the nearer the end of the lane you come, the less you can see, because you are looking very nearly parallel with the road, and there is more hedge to see through; and near the end you come to a blind spot, where you simply can't see anything except the road directly in front of you. Then as I—until you get with your eyes just even with the hedge; then you get your first real view of the road. You can see all the way; you can see up the road then."

The above is plaintiff's testimony as to the conditions. Plaintiff testified that, as he was emerging on the road, he blew his horn; that he suddenly saw the defendant's car close on; that that car swerved to the left, and the front cleared him, but that the rear skidded and caught the front of the plaintiff's car and swung it over to the right; that the defendant's oar went on, and the rear wheels...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Pierce v. Bean, 2161
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • 29 Julio 1941
  • McCartney v. Westbrook
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • 1 Abril 1930
    ... ... defendant, or to give the requested instruction ... In ... Wilson v. Kuhn, 130 A. 468, 469, 3 N. J. Misc. R ... 1032, it appeared that the plaintiff had driven out upon a ... private highway where his ... ...
  • Francisco v. Coca Cola Bottling Co. of N.Y., Inc.
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • 11 Marzo 1932
    ...822, the court held that it was clearly a jury question and that the verdict as rendered was justified. In the case of Wilson v. Kuhn, 130 A. 468, 3 N. J. Misc. R. 1032, there was evidence that defendant's automobile was going 50 miles an hour, and it was held that that speed alone warrante......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT