Legal Opinion

Kerr Et Ux. v. Hofer (Et Al.)

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 31, 1941No. Appeal, 23PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

It is contended by appellant that the court below abused its discretion and acted in an arbitrary manner in granting two new trials in this case. In its opinion following the last trial, the court states, “the interests of right and justice require that this case should be retried.” We will not interfere with the action of the trial court under such circumstances: Reese v. Pittsburgh Rys. Co., 336 Pa. 299, 9 A. 2d 394.

Order affirmed.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Reese v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Weinfeld v. FunkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  2. Gerber v. Jones (Et Al.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  3. Phillips v. American Stores Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  4. Rosanoff v. Duquesne UniversitySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  5. Zoni v. Mut. Life Ins. Co. of N.Y.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943

7 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