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

CHARLES HAGER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. CHARLES WEBER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

PER CURIAM.

The only ground advanced by defendant-appellant, Charles Weber, for reversal of the judgment entered against him in the sum of $6,500, by the Middlesex County Court, Law Division, is that the verdict of the jury is excessive. The plaintiff's action is grounded upon defendant's negligence as the proximate cause of plaintiff's damages arising out of an automobile accident.

We have carefully reviewed the record and are satisfied that the verdict is clearly excessive. It should be reduced to the sum of $3,500 and we so direct. If this is not acceptable to plaintiff, then, in view of the fact that defendant has not raised any question as to the jury's finding of liability against him, a new trial for damages only is directed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HAGER v. WEBER
(Jun 14, 1950)