Case Name: EDWARD A. LEE, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. THE NORTH JERSEY STREET RAILWAY COMPANY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1901-06-17
Citations: 66 N.J.L. 336
Docket Number: 
Parties: EDWARD A. LEE, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. THE NORTH JERSEY STREET RAILWAY COMPANY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 66
Pages: 336–337

Head Matter:
EDWARD A. LEE, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. THE NORTH JERSEY STREET RAILWAY COMPANY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR.
Argued March 19, 1901
Decided June 17, 1901.
On error to the Supreme Court.
For the defendant in error, Jeremiah A. Kiernan.
For the plaintiff in error, Jarvis N. Atkinson.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The only assignments of error are directed to the refusal of the trial court to nonsuit at the conclusion of the plaintiff's ease, and to direct a verdict for defendant when all the evidence was in.
The bills of exception upon which the assignments of error are based disclose evidence of the negligence of the motorman who was running the trolley car which collided with the vehicle plaintiff was driving, proper to be submitted to the jury. While the proof that plaintiff contributed to the collision by his own negligence was of considerable weight, it was encountered by contradictory evidence. Upon the whole evidence, the question whether plaintiff exercised the required care was properly submitted to the jury.
No error in these respects being discoverable, the judgment must be affirmed.
For 'affirmance — The Chancellor, Dixon, Garrison, Gummere, Collins, Port, Hendrickson, Bogert, Adams, Yredenburgh, Yoorhees, Yroom. 12.
For reversal — None.