From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rugg v. Driwood Corp.

Court of Errors and Appeals
Jan 9, 1942
23 A.2d 404 (N.J. 1942)

Opinion

Submitted October 31, 1941 —

Decided January 9, 1942.

On appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, whose opinion is reported in 126 N.J.L. 566.

For the prosecutor-appellant, John W. Taylor and Harry E. Walburg.

For the defendant-respondent, S. Martin Mandon and Martin Kimmel.


This is an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court on certiorari affirming an award in favor of a workman in a case of hernia resulting from strain. In so far as the questions sought to be raised may be raised on appeal in this court we are in accord with the opinion of Mr. Justice Perskie in the Supreme Court.

The judgment is affirmed.


My vote is for a reversal, for the reason expressed in a dissent filed this day in DiMieri v. Metafield, Inc., 127 N.J.L. 597.

Mr. Justice Case has authorized me to say that he acquiesces in this opinion.

For affirmance — THE CHANCELLOR, CHIEF JUSTICE, DONGES, HEHER, DEAR, WELLS, WOLFSKEIL, RAFFERTY, HAGUE, THOMPSON, JJ. 10.

For reversal — PARKER, CASE, COLIE, JJ. 3.


Summaries of

Rugg v. Driwood Corp.

Court of Errors and Appeals
Jan 9, 1942
23 A.2d 404 (N.J. 1942)
Case details for

Rugg v. Driwood Corp.

Case Details

Full title:MEYER RUGG, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, v. DRIWOOD CORPORATION…

Court:Court of Errors and Appeals

Date published: Jan 9, 1942

Citations

23 A.2d 404 (N.J. 1942)
23 A.2d 404