Case ID: njl_97/html/0560-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Pee Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

THE AUTOCAR SALES AND SERVICE COMPANY, A CORPORATION, RESPONDENT, v. JOHN J. SCHEURER, APPELLANT.
    Submitted March 27, 1922
    Decided June 19, 1922.
    On appeal from the Supreme Court, in which the following per curiam was filed:
    “In this case judgment was given by the trial court to the plaintiff for the sum of $250 for repairs to an autocar, the defendant’s counter-claim being overruled by the court.
    .“The only point involved in the case is one of evidence. The plaintiff produced the original slips from which the records were taken. The slips were made at the time the work was done. Each one of them was 0. IC.’d by the mechanical superintendent, being the original entries. They were admitted in evidence. We think this was not error, the point being controlled by our decisions in the cases of Diament v. Colloty, 66 N. J. L. 295; Corkran v. Rutter, 76 Id. 375.
    “The judgment of the district court is affirmed, with costs.”
    Eor the appellant, Seufert & Dim,ore.
    
   Pee Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Supreme Court.

For affirmamcc — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Teen-chard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Heppenheimer, Williams, Ackerson, Van Buskirk, JJ. 10.

For reversal — Wi-iite, J. 1.