Opinion
January 6, 1942.
January 26, 1942.
Appeals — Review — Order granting new trial — Discretion of court below — Reasons.
An order granting a new trial in an action of trespass because in the opinion of the trial court there had been "a manifest miscarriage of justice", due in large extent to the introduction of irrelevant and prejudicial issues into the trial by defendant's attorney, was affirmed on appeal, in the absence of any showing of an abuse of discretion.
Argued January 6, 1942.
Before SCHAFFER, C. J.; MAXEY, DREW, LINN, STERN, PATTERSON and PARKER, JJ.
Appeals, Nos. 304 and 305, Jan. T., 1941, from order of C. P. No. 1 (tried in C. P. No. 2), Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1939, No. 312, in case of Frank Schornig et ux. v. Peter Speer. Order affirmed.
Trespass for personal injuries. Before GORDON, P. J.
Verdict for defendant. Motion by plaintiffs for new trial granted. Defendant appealed.
Abraham Wernick, with him I. Nathaniel Treblow, for appellant.
Herbert Welty and Fred C. Gartner, for appellees, were not heard.
This is an appeal from the order of the court below granting a new trial in an action of trespass to recover damages for injuries sustained by the plaintiffs while guests in an automobile owned and driven by defendant. The jury returned a verdict for defendant. The court granted a new trial, because in its opinion there had been "a manifest miscarriage of justice", due in large extent to the introduction of irrelevant and prejudicial issues into the trial by defendant's attorney. No abuse of discretion is shown. This being so, we will not interfere with the new trial order: Weinfeld v. Funk, 342 Pa. 160, 20 A.2d 206; Murphy v. McGinnis, 343 Pa. 255, 22 A.2d 649.
Order affirmed.