TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Staubach v. Cities Service Oil Co.

Anna Staubach, Petitioner-Prosecutor v. Cities Service Oil Co., Respondent-Defendant.

Staubach v. Cities Serv. Oil Co., 24 A.2d 193 (N.J. 1942)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 3, 1942
Judges
Bobine, Perskte, Porter
Citations
24 A.2d 193127 N.J.L. 5771942 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 190

Opinion of the Court — Bobine

Bobine, J.

This ease comes before us on the return to a rule to show cause why a writ of certiorari should not issue to review a judgment dismissing prosecutor’s petition.

It is conceded that no appeal was taken from the Bureau to the Pleas. Failure to do so is raised and argued. The eases are fully treated in Licker v. J. G. Martin Box Co., 127 N. J. L.

136. The general rule is that a writ does not ordinarily go where an appeal lies.

Petitioner’s husband was killed under circumstances fully stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court in Staubach v. Cities Service Oil Co., 126 N. J. L.

479. The suit in that case was brought September 26th, 1940. The Bureau’s action was previous thereto and on May 24th, 1940. The deceased was killed when a fellow employe threw a quantity of gasoline over him while he was working near an acetyline torch. It occurred in a spirit of skylarking, and the proofs do not show *578 that such conduct was customary and within the knowledge of the employer. The findings of the Bureau are supported by the proofs.

There was testimony that in the summer the men did throw water at one another. The persons in charge of the operation of the plant denied knowledge of this, but assuming knowledge of water throwing at lunch, and when not observed, there is no reason whatever that the employer should anticipate that one employee would destroy another by throwing gasoline over him while he was working with a torch.

The rule will be dismissed, without costs.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list