Case ID: njl_117/html/0294-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ELMER E. TARBURTON, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. ALBERT C. HAGEMANN AND EDWARD POLE, PARTNERS, TRADING AS HAGEMANN & POLE, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
    Argued October 20, 1936
    Decided October 20, 1936.
    For the defendants-appellants, Ralph W. Wescott and Louis B. LeDuc.
    
    For the plaintiff-respondent, French, Richards & Bradley (Floyd H. Bradley).
    
   Per Curiam.

The proofs examined, it clearly appears that a factual question arose as to whether the plaintiff was an invitee at the time of his injuries. This factual question was submitted to the jury by the learned trial judge in a fair and well balanced charge. Timannus v. DeWitt, 109 N. J. L. 168.

The judgment under review is affirmed.

For affirmance — -The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Trenchard, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Heher, Perskie, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, Cole, JJ. 15.

For reversal — None.