Case ID: ad_239/html/0757-01.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

Anna Sturckler, an Infant, by Edward A. Sturckler, Her Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. John Lux and Justice Motor Corporation, Appellants.
   Per Curiam.

We find that the learned trial court was not required to charge the request specified as the second ground for setting aside the judgments — for the reason that the request omits considerations essential to the conclusion sought. In view of the preponderance of the evidence favoring a finding of no negligence in defendant Lux and taking into account the whole charge, we conclude that the technical error first specified as a reason for granting a new trial was not of sufficient materiality to warrant the action taken. Furthermore, this portion of the charge was not the subject of an exception or a request to charge. All concur. Order reversed on the law and facts, with costs, and judgment reinstated. [See post, p. 765.]