Case ID: pa-super_159/html/0508-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Durdella, Appellant, v. Rothman et al.
    Argued October 4, 1946.
    Before Baldrige, P. J., Rhodes, Hirt, Reno, Dithrich, Ross and Arnold, JJ.
    
      George O’Dougherty, for appellant.
    
      Thomas Z. Mmehart and Charles A. Rothman, for appellees, were not heard.
    October 8, 1946:
   Per Curiam,

We find no merit in the contention of appellant that the court abused its discretion and acted in an arbitrary manner in granting a new trial in this case. It appears that a new trial was granted, not on questions of law but in the exercise of a general discretion. Our appellate courts have uniformly held that under such circumstances the action of the lower court will not be reviewed. Com. v. Dolan et al., 155 Pa. Superior Ct. 453, 456, 38 A. 2d 497; Kerr et ux. v. Kofer et al., 341 Pa. 47, 17 A. 2d 886; Weinfeld v. Funk, 342 Pa. 160, 20 A. 2d 206.

Order affirmed.