Opinion
November 12, 1970.
June 1, 1971.
Practice — New trial — Inconsistent verdict — New trial as to an parties.
In this case, it was Held that jury verdicts in favor of one of four similarly situated plaintiffs and in favor of defendant with respect to the other three plaintiffs, two of whom had suffered undisputed property damage, were inconsistent verdicts justifying a new trial as to all.
Mr. Chief Justice BELL took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Mr. Justice COHEN took no part in the decision of this case.
Argued November 12, 1970. Before JONES, COHEN, EAGEN, O'BRIEN, ROBERTS and POMEROY, JJ.
Appeals, Nos. 421 and 422, Jan. T., 1970, from orders of Court of Common Pleas, Trial Division, of Philadelphia, March T., 1967, No. 679, in case of Julius Gross et ux. and Raymond Horwitz and Carol Gross Horwitz v. Lockwood Folding Box Corp. and Richard B. Dubrow v. The Hertz Corporation, Charles Martin and Lockwood Folding Box Corporation. Orders affirmed.
Trespass actions consolidated for trial. Before PIEKARSKI, J.
Verdict in favor of plaintiff, Carol Gross Horwitz, and against defendant, Lockwood Folding Box Corporation, and in favor of defendant and against all other plaintiffs. Motions by plaintiffs for new trials granted. Defendant appealed.
William J. O'Brien, with him Pepper, Hamilton Scheetz, for appellant.
Jack J. Bernstein, with him B. Nathaniel Richter, and Richter, Syken, Ross, Binder O'Neill, for appellees.
John W. Kormes, for appellee.
The jury verdicts in favor of one of four similarly situated plaintiffs and in favor of defendant with respect to the other three plaintiffs, two of whom suffered undisputed property damage, are inconsistent verdicts justifying a new trial as to all. See Thompson v. Iannuzzi, 403 Pa. 329, 169 A.2d 777 (1961); Pascarella v. Pgh. Rwys. Co., 389 Pa. 8, 131 A.2d 445 (1957). See also Kessler v. Matlack, 210 Pa. Super. 450, 233 A.2d 592 (1967).
Orders granting new trials affirmed.
Mr. Chief Justice BELL took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Mr. Justice COHEN took no part in the decision of this case.