Opinion
September 29, 1944.
October 31, 1944.
Evidence — Admissibility — Transcript of proceedings before alderman — Action of trespass.
1. In an action of trespass for false arrest, the admission of a certified transcript of the proceedings before an alderman, offered in evidence by the defendant, constitutes prejudicial error. [473-4]
Appeals — Review — Order granting new trial — Discretion of court below.
2. An order granting a new trial because of prejudicial error in the admission of evidence will not be reversed on appeal. [474]
Argued September 29, 1944.
Before MAXEY, C. J., DREW, LINN, STERN, PATTERSON and STEARNE, JJ.
Appeal, No. 226, March T., 1944, from order of C. P., Allegheny Co., Oct. T., 1943, No. 1435, in case of William Auslander v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company. Order affirmed.
Trespass. Before PATTERSON, J.
Verdict for defendant. Motion by plaintiff for new trial granted. Defendant appealed.
Robert D. Dalzell, of Dalzell, McFall, Pringle Bredin, for appellant.
Roy T. Clunk, with him Barney Phillips, for appellee.
This appeal is from an order granting a new trial. The trial judge had admitted a certified transcript of the proceedings before an alderman, offered in evidence by defendant. The learned court below en banc says: "We believe this to have been substantial and prejudicial error such as warrants a new trial, and for that reason alone a new trial will be granted: Magee v. Scott, 32 Pa. 539-540; Katterman v. Stitzer, 7 Watts 189-192; Wolverton v. Com., for use, 7 S. R. 273-4; Miller v. Brink, 14 Pa. D. C. 292. "
We agree that the admission of the transcript was prejudicial error. There was, therefore, no abuse of discretion in granting a new trial. We have uniformly held that under such circumstances we will not interfere with the action of the court below: Kerr v. Hofer, 341 Pa. 47, 17 A.2d 886; Weinfeld v. Funk, 342 Pa. 160, 20 A.2d 206; Schornig v. Speer, 343 Pa. 649, 24 A.2d 12.
Order affirmed.