Legal Opinion · Dissent

Edelson v. Ochroch

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 4, 1955No. Appeals, 205, 206 and 207Published

1Dissent

*430Dissenting Opinion by

Mb. Justice Chidsey:

I am compelled to dissent. The majority opinion is a blanket approval of tbe action of tbe court below which, in turn, clearly rests upon a usurpation of the constitutional fact-finding function of tbe jury.

We have been confronted with an increasing number of appeals from rulings of tbe lower courts wherein new trials have been granted “in tbe interest of justice” because tbe verdict was considered against tbe weight of tbe evidence. In tbe recent case of Decker v. Kulesza, 369 Pa. 259, 85 A. 2d 413, at p. 263 we said: “While an award of a new trial is…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Jones Et Vir v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  2. Byrne v. Schultz (Stone)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  3. Bellettiere v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  4. Carroll v. PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  5. Decker v. KuleszaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952

6 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