Case Name: Crowl Building Company, Appellant, v. Beacon Match Company
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1927-12-16
Citations: 91 Pa. Super. 580
Docket Number: Appeal No. 9
Parties: Crowl Building Company, Appellant, v. Beacon Match Company.
Judges: Before Porter, P. J., Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn, Gawthrop and Cunningham, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports
Volume: 91
Pages: 580–581

Head Matter:
Crowl Building Company, Appellant, v. Beacon Match Company.
Argued October 25, 1927.
Before Porter, P. J., Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn, Gawthrop and Cunningham, JJ.
Charles C. Lark, and with him A. F. Gilbert, for appellant.
Bichará II. Klein, of Knight and Taggart, and with him Charles P. Ulrich, for appellee.
December 16, 1927:

Opinion:
Per Curiam,
Appellants got a verdict in their suit to recover a balance due for work and labor done. On defendant's motion, a new trial was granted. That action is the sole error assigned. We have examined the record in the light of the argument presented on behalf of appellants and have concluded that no abuse of discretion has been shown within the rules so thoroughly considered in Class & Nachod Brewing Co. v. Giacobello, 277 Pa. 530.
Judgment affirmed.