Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

WILLIAM F. WALSH, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. JOHN D. HILL,DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered PER CURIAM.

In this automobile negligence case the Appellate Division disagreed as to whether a portion of the trial judge's charge to the jury was prejudicially erroneous. The majority found no such error.

In reviewing the matter we have examined the criticized portion in the context of the entire charge. When so viewed, and even though the challenged language is not as clear as it might have been, we cannot say that legal error appears.

Accordingly the judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed.

For affirmance — Chief Justice WEINTRAUB and Justices FRANCIS, PROCTOR, HALL, SCHETTINO and HANEMAN — 6.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

WALSH v. HILL
(Dec 18, 1967)