Case Name: Elizabeth D. DONLIN and Leo A. Donlin, her husband v. J. J. NEWBERRY CO. and McCrory Corp., Appellants
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1982-01-19
Citations: 294 Pa. Super. 543
Docket Number: Appeal No. 2363
Parties: Elizabeth D. DONLIN and Leo A. Donlin, her husband v. J. J. NEWBERRY CO. and McCrory Corp., Appellants.
Judges: Before McEWEN, MONTEMURO and SHERTZ , JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports
Volume: 294
Pages: 543–543

Head Matter:
440 A.2d 598
Elizabeth D. DONLIN and Leo A. Donlin, her husband v. J. J. NEWBERRY CO. and McCrory Corp., Appellants.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
Argued June 1, 1981.
Filed Jan. 19, 1982.
Richard A. Gray, Williamsport, for appellants.
Michael J. DiSisti, Williamsport, for appellees.
Before McEWEN, MONTEMURO and SHERTZ , JJ.
SHERTZ, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
This is an appeal from an order denying a motion for new trial and judgment n. o. v. In light of the fact that the order has not been reduced to judgment and docketed, we cannot consider the merits of appellants' contentions. "An order denying a motion for a new trial . . . does not constitute an appealable order." Pa.R.A.P. 301(c). Therefore, this appeal is premature and must be quashed. Slagter v. Mix, 441 Pa. 272, 272 A.2d 885 (1971); Richard v. Chester Extended Care Center, 287 Pa.Super. 289, 430 A.2d 290 (1981); Brogley v. Chambersburg Engineering Co., 283 Pa. Super. 562, 424 A.2d 952 (1981).
The appeal is quashed.
. Neither appellants nor appellee filed a praecipe that the lower court's order should be reduced to judgment and docketed.