Legal Opinion

Dougherty v. McLaughlin

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 17, 1994No. 844 and 886PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHNSON, Judge:

In this case, we are asked to determine whether the trial court properly granted Brian Dougherty’s motion for additur, increasing the jury’s damage award, when the trial court determined that the jury’s verdict was inadequate. Since we conclude that, where a jury renders an inadequate verdict, the proper remedy is the grant of a new trial, we vacate and remand this matter for a new trial.

Dougherty commenced this action against David McLaughlin to recover damages for personal injuries resulting from an automobile accident. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of Dougherty. He…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Boggavarapu v. PonistSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  2. Krivijanski v. Union RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  3. Bortner v. GladfelterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Morris v. PeckynoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  5. Gaspero v. GentileSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1946

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Gorski v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Davis v. MullenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  3. Majczyk v. OeschSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  4. Fischer v. TroianoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  5. Davis v. MullenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API