Case Name: Baranowski et al. v. Lackawanna & Wyoming Valley R. R. Co., Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1927-03-14
Citations: 288 Pa. 461
Docket Number: Appeals, Nos., 102 and 106
Parties: Baranowski et al. v. Lackawanna & Wyoming Valley R. R. Co., Appellant.
Judges: Before Moschzisker, C. J., Frazer, Walling, Kephart and Schaefer, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania State Reports
Volume: 288
Pages: 461–462

Head Matter:
Baranowski et al. v. Lackawanna & Wyoming Valley R. R. Co., Appellant.
Argued January 25,1927.
Before Moschzisker, C. J., Frazer, Walling, Kephart and Schaefer, JJ.
William J. Fitzgerald and Joseph O’Brien, for appellant.
James J. Powell, with him David J. Reedy, for appellee.
March 14, 1927:

Opinion:
Per Curiam,
In this action to recover damages for personal injuries to the minor plaintiff, caused by the alleged negligence of the defendant company, defendant moved for a new trial and judgment n. o. v.; the first motion was granted by the court below and the second was refused. Notwithstanding the fact that defendant asked for a new trial, we now have before us a complaint that error was committed in granting this motion; appellant contends the court erred in not entering judgment in its favor, because, it argues, the evidence relied on by plaintiffs failed to show defendant guilty of negligence, and the court below should have so ruled instead of granting a new trial.
If this case was upon appeals from judgments in plaintiffs' favor, we might be impressed by the points made in the argument of defendant's counsel, but on appeals from an order granting a new trial, ever since the Act of April 9, 1925, P. L. 221, our review is greatly restricted and we will not make any such extensive examination of the evidence as would be required to determine properly appellant's contentions; see Pringle v. Smith, 286 Pa. 152.
The orders appealed from are affirmed.