Practice — New trial — Verdict — Inadequacy — Evidence.
In a motor vehicle collision case, in which it appeared that wife plaintiff was injured when an automobile, owned by her but operated by husband plaintiff, was struck by defendant's car, and that the jury returned a verdict in favor of the husband for $490, and a verdict in favor of the wife for $260; that the husband's verdict represented the doctor, hospital and drug expenses, plus a small amount for loss of consortium, and the wife's verdict represented the property damages and about $150 for pain and suffering; and that the court below, holding that, although the verdicts were small, they were in the circumstances substantial, refused plaintiffs' motion for a new trial; it was Held that the judgments of the court below should be affirmed.
Argued November 14, 1962.
OPINION PER CURIAM, December 12, 1962:
The judgments of the court below are affirmed on the opinion of Judge SAMUEL A. WEISS of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, as reported in 28 Pa. D. C. 2d 581.