Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

87 Conn. 527

89 A 186

Streitweiser v. Lightbourn

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided December 20, 1913

Supreme Court of Connecticut · decided 1913-12-20

Action to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by the defendant’s negligence in running his automobile into and over the plaintiff, brought to the Superior Court in New Haven County and tried to the jury before Gager, J.; verdict and judgment for the plaintiff for $700, and appeal by the defendant. No error.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1945

1 state decisions

Relies on Smith v. Powers

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1913-12-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1 The evidence in this ease is such that the issues as to the defendant’s negligence and the plaintiff’s lack of contributory negligence were properly submitted to the jury, and from it the jury might reasonably have found in favor of the plaintiff upon both issues. The court did not err in so holding, and in refusing to set aside the verdict.

¶2 The defendant’s motion for a judgment notwith *528 standing the verdict was entirely inappropriate to the situation before the court. Such a judgment is not rendered upon the evidence, but upon the admissions of the pleadings. The judgment is in its essence one by confession. The defendant’s pleadings consisted solely of denials of the allegations of the complaint. Of necessity, therefore, there are no uncontroverted allegations entitling him to a judgment, even if it be assumed that such a judgment may be rendered in favor of a defendant upon the plaintiff’s cause of action, as at common law it could not be. 1 Swift’s Digest, s. p. 779; Stephen on Pleading, s. p. 98; Schermerhorn v. Schermerhorn, 5 Wend. (N. Y.) 513, 514; Smith v. Powers, 15 N. H. 546, 562; 11 Eney. of Pleading & Practice, 912, 913.

¶3 There is no error.

/87/conn/527 · .json · Public domain