N.J. Constitutional Convention: Vol. 4, Page 373
which have no business being there. I think Justice Brogan knows much better than I do how true that is. On questions as to who is at fault in intersection accidents, and a lot of the workmen's compensation work, etc., some procedure should be worked out to keep those away from the Court of Errors and Appeals.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Then you would have some intermediate court which would hear those appeals?
MR. GAULKIN: No, I think that perhaps could be done by giving appeals in those cases only as a matter of privilege, not as a matter of law.
MR. WINNE: Don't you think that every litigant has a right to go beyond a jury trial? You wouldn't have any satisfaction with lawyers and the public if you didn't have one appeal?
MR. GAULKIN: Well, if it's a workmen's compensation case, it ought to be appealed to the Common Pleas. They should have one right of appeal.
MR. WINNE: Let's talk about the ordinary tort action. You have a verdict for or against you. Do you say we should stop without any appeal under the rule of evidence, etc.?
MR. GAULKIN: If the Court of Errors and Appeals can handle it, all right.
MR. WINNE: You have got to have the right of one appeal.
MR. GAULKIN: I agree with you there, and somewhere there should be some supervision.
MR. WINNE: I agree that you shouldn't necessarily get to the highest court except by favor, but you must allow one appeal somewhere.
MR. SOMMER: Are you opposed to multiple appeals except in the acceptable cases?
MR. GAULKIN: Precisely.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Any further questions?
VICE-CHAIRMAN: May I express the thanks of the Committee for your appearance here today, your presentation and the amount of work that it entailed?
MR. GAULKIN: It was my pleasure. Thank you for inviting me.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: We will now adjourn for lunch and reconvene at 2:00 o'clock.
(Session adjourned for lunch)
Previous Page in Book ********* Table of Contents *********** Next Page in Book