Appeals — Appealable orders — Interlocutory orders — Order dismissing post-trial motions — Failure to enter judgment on verdict — Quashing appeal.
An appeal from an order dismissing a motion for judgment non obstante veredicto or, in the alternative, for a new trial, where no judgment has been entered on the verdict, must be quashed as an appeal from an interlocutory order.
OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE JONES, September 27, 1966:
Subsequent to a jury verdict in favor of Averlean Lynch against Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (Metropolitan) in an assumpsit action in the Court of Common Pleas No. 7 of Philadelphia County, Metropolitan filed motions for judgment n.o.v. or, in the alternative, a new trial. On November 8, 1965, the court below entered an order dismissing Metropolitan's motions. From that order the instant appeal was taken. No judgment on the verdict has ever been entered. In the absence of such judgment no appeal lies. In Menyo v. Sphar, 409 Pa. 223, 224 (footnote), 186 A.2d 9, we recently said: "Too many members of the Bar mistakenly believe that the appeal is from an Order which dismissed their motion for a new trial, instead of from a judgment which was entered on the verdict: [citing authorities]." See also: Denmon v. Rhodes, 416 Pa. 568, 569, 207 A.2d 860; Gelzhiser v. Fisher, 418 Pa. 88, 208 A.2d 836.
The stipulation entered into between the parties' counsel and approved by the court below as to the amount of the verdict and the interest thereon cannot be construed to take the place of a judgment entered on the verdict.
The instant appeal, being premature, must be quashed.