Wilson v. Kuhn
Decision Date | 07 October 1925 |
Docket Number | No. 20.,20. |
Citation | 130 A. 468 |
Parties | WILSON v. KUHN. |
Court | New 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.
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:
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- Pierce v. Bean, 2161
-
McCartney v. Westbrook
... ... 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.
...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......