Legal Opinion

Larimer, Trustee v. Cambria Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 19, 1937No. Appeal, 79Published

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

The three judges of the court below sitting in banc, were all of the opinion that the verdict of the jury was so inadequate in amount as to call for a new trial. A new trial was accordingly ordered on that ground. This was a matter peculiarly within the discretion of the court below, which an appellate court will not review unless a palpable abuse of power appears: Class & Nachod Brewing Co. v. Giacobello, 277 Pa. 530, 121 A. 333; Haltzel v. Printz, 267 Pa. 156, 110 A. 161; Dougherty v. Andrews, 202 Pa. 633, 52 A. 47; Cooper v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 323 Pa. 295, 304, 186 A.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Class & Nachod Brewing Co. v. GiacobelloSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  2. Cooper v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  3. Danboro & Plumsteadville Turnpike Road Co. v. Bucks CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
  4. Dougherty v. AndrewsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
  5. Leonard v. HoustonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935

1 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