Opinion
January 31, 1941.
Appeals — Review — Grant of new trial — Discretion of court below.
Where, in the opinion of the court below, right and justice require a retrial, an order granting a new trial will not be set aside on appeal.
Submitted January 20, 1941.
Before SCHAFFER, C. J., MAXEY, DREW, LINN, STERN, PATTERSON and PARKER, JJ.
Appeal, No. 23, Jan. T., 1941, from order of C. P. Lycoming Co., Dec. T., 1935, No. 284, in case of Frank L. Kerr et ux. v. Hamilton G. Hofer, administrator, and Bernard Lewis, administrator d. b. n. Order affirmed.
Trespass for personal injuries and property damage. Before LARRABEE, P. J.
Verdict for defendant and plaintiffs' motion for new trial granted. Defendant appealed.
Error assigned, among others, was order granting new trial.
John E. Cupp, John B. Cupp and Clyde E. Williamson, for appellant.
John C. Youngman, for appellee.
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.