From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Homan v. Losch

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Mar 19, 1951
366 Pa. 525 (Pa. 1951)

Opinion

January 8, 1951.

March 19, 1951.

Appeals — Review — Verdict — Excessiveness.

In this suit for personal injuries, it was Held, in the circumstances, that a verdict of $7,500 for the wife-plaintiff, and of $2,398.51 for her husband, were not excessive as a matter of law.

Before DREW, C. J., STERN, STEARNE, JONES, BELL, LADNER and CHIDSEY, JJ.

Appeal, No. 80, Jan. T., 1951, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Berks County, Sept. T., 1949, No. 153, in case of Ralph E. Homan et ux. v. Ray Losch et al. Judgment affirmed.

Trespass for personal injuries and property damage. Before MAYS, P.J.

Verdicts, in favor of plaintiff-husband in sum of $2398.51, and for plaintiff-wife in sum of $7500., and against all defendants, and judgments entered thereon. Executrix of defendant Smith appealed.

Robert I. Cottom, with him Harry R. Matten and Matten Matten, for appellant.

Charles H. Weidner, with him Stevens Lee, for appellees.


The sole question here is whether a verdict of $7,500 for the wife-plaintiff and $2,398.51 for the husband-plaintiff, is so excessive as to warrant our interference. The injuries were sustained on or about November 10, 1947, by the wife-plaintiff in an accident by which the automobile in which she was riding with her husband was struck by one of the motor cars of the two defendants, a collision between which caused the defendant, Smith's, automobile to be pushed against that of the plaintiffs. A verdict was returned against both defendants. The injuries suffered by the wife resulted in the permanent impairment or restricted use of the right arm and hand. She still suffered pain at the time of the trial, which was over two years after the date of the accident. The learned trial judge reviewed the evidence as to the nature, character and extent of the injuries and was satisfied with the verdict. He was not shocked by the amount of the verdict rendered either for the wife-plaintiff or the husband-plaintiff and we must say that neither are we.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Homan v. Losch

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Mar 19, 1951
366 Pa. 525 (Pa. 1951)
Case details for

Homan v. Losch

Case Details

Full title:Homan v. Losch (et al., Appellant)

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Mar 19, 1951

Citations

366 Pa. 525 (Pa. 1951)
79 A.2d 242

Citing Cases

Smith v. Lit Bros.

Defendant Lit Brothers is not entitled to a new trial on the ground that the verdicts are excessive. Although…

Lebeck v. William A. Jarvis, Inc.

a. Limitation of motion of left arm due to pectorales major muscle and limitation on ability to use crutch…