Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

Kerr et ux. v. Hofer (et al., Apellant).

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.

PER CURIAM, January 31, 1941:

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.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

KERR ET UX. v. HOFER (ET AL.)
(Jan 31, 1941)