Case Name: Durdella, Appellant, v. Rothman et al.
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1946-10-08
Citations: 159 Pa. Super. 508
Docket Number: Appeal, No. 88
Parties: Durdella, Appellant, v. Rothman et al.
Judges: Before Baldrige, P. J., Rhodes, Hirt, Reno, Dithrich, Ross and Arnold, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports
Volume: 159
Pages: 508–508

Head Matter:
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:

Opinion:
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.