Court Opinion

ID: 9718121
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 07:17:20.858256+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:45:33.271016
License: Public Domain

*80McEWEN, Judge,
concurring.
I join in the fine expression of the majority, and write simply to note that, while it is always preferable to give effect to the intent of the jury as evidenced by its verdict, there is no doubt that this Court is compelled to the holding that the satisfaction of judgment, entered on the docket by counsel for the plaintiff/appellant, precludes any further action against Hazelton City Authority. See Brandt v. Eagle, 412 Pa.Super. 171, 178, 602 A.2d 1364, 1367 (1992).