Opinion
October 29, 1930.
October 31, 1930.
Appeal — Order granting new trial — No question requiring discussion.
Where no question requiring discussion is raised in an appeal from an order granting a new trial in an action of trespass, the judgment of the court below will be affirmed.
Appeal No. 246, October T., 1930, by defendant from decree of C.P., Northumberland County, September T., 1929, No. 320, in the case of Robert Riegel and Sophie Riegel, his wife, v. J.E. Wilt.
Before TREXLER, P.J., KELLER, LINN, GAWTHROP, CUNNINGHAM, BALDRIGE and WHITMORE, JJ. Affirmed.
Trespass to recover for personal injuries. Before STROUSE, P.J.
The opinion of the Superior Court states the case.
Verdict for Robert Riegel in the sum of $629.50 and for Sophie Riegel in the sum of $20.
The court subsequently, on motion, refused a new trial in the case of Sophie Riegel and granted a new trial in the case of Robert Riegel. Defendant appealed.
Error assigned, among others, was the order of the court.
R.H. Klein of Knight, Taggart, Klein and Reich, for appellant.
Samuel Gubin of Cummings and Gubin, for appellee.
Argued October 29, 1930.
This appeal is from an order granting a new trial in an action of trespass. No question requiring discussion is raised. The judgment is affirmed.