Opinion
Submitted May 28, 1937 —
Decided September 22, 1937.
On appeal from the Supreme Court, in which the following per curiam was filed:
"While a passenger upon one of the tube trains owned and operated by the defendant, plaintiff suffered injuries of the hand from broken glass which fell from a car door while the train was in motion; and he was awarded a verdict by the jury empaneled to try the cause. The defendant appeals from the consequent judgment.
"We find no error in the denial of defendant's motion for a nonsuit. The case is ruled by Scilimbracca v. Central Railroad Company of New Jersey, 7 N.J. Mis. R. 635; affirmed, 107 N.J.L. 192.
"And the motion to direct a verdict for defendant, upon the ground that there was no evidence to sustain an inference of negligence, was by like reasoning properly denied.
"The criticism of the charge is insubstantial. Assuming a lack of technical accuracy, there was no substantial injury to defendant. Considered as a whole, the instructions correctly laid down the apposite principles; and it is inconceivable that the jury were misled or confused by the excerpts made the basis of the instant complaint.
"The judgment is accordingly affirmed, with costs."
For the appellant, Messrs. Collins Corbin.
For the respondent, Nathan Baker.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — THE CHANCELLOR, CHIEF JUSTICE, PARKER, LLOYD, CASE, DONGES, PERSKIE, DEAR, WELLS, WOLFSKEIL, RAFFERTY, COLE, JJ. 12.
For reversal — None.