Remington v. Shults Bread Co.

No opinion. Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr and Rich, JJ., concurred; Burr, J., dissented upon the ground that, in view of plaintiff’s bill of particulars, which states that the wagon which injured plaintiff was marked “Droste Bakery Wagon No. 2,” the charge of the trial justice to the effect that if plaintiff was injured by any wagon of the defendant on the evening in question, even if it was not wagon No. 2, plaintiff was entitled to recover, was erroneous.