BAIZ v. ATLANTIC REFINING CO., 314 Pa. 17 (1934)

170 A. 268

Baiz v. Atlantic Refining Company, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.January 2, 1934.
January 30, 1934.

Appeals — Judgment entered on verdict — Evidence — Conclusiveness.

On an appeal from judgment entered on a verdict the appellate court is concluded by the finding of the jury where the record discloses evidence to support it.

Argued January 2, 1934.

Before FRAZER, C. J., SIMPSON, KEPHART, SCHAFFER, MAXEY, DREW and LINN, JJ.

Appeal, No. 57, Jan. T., 1934, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., May T., 1928, No. 858, in case of Johanna Baiz v. The Atlantic Refining Company. Judgment affirmed.

Trespass for death of plaintiff’s husband. Before JONES, J.

The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.

Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appealed.

Page 18

Error assigned, inter alia, was refusal of judgment n. o. v., quoting record.

Thomas Byron Miller, with him Wm. A. Valentine, Jr., for appellant.

John H. Dando, Richard B. Sheridan and William A. Corcoran, for appellee, were not heard.

PER CURIAM, January 30, 1934.

Defendant appeals from the refusal of its motion for judgment n. o. v. and new trial, after verdict for plaintiff, in an action of trespass arising from a collision between two trucks. All questions raised by appellant relate to matters of fact which were left to the jury under proper instructions and resolved in plaintiff’s favor. As the record discloses ample testimony to support the finding of the jury, we are concluded thereby: Remppis v. Ettelt, 310 Pa. 479; Rossheim v. Bornot, 310 Pa. 154; Adams v. Gardiner, 306 Pa. 576; Sheasley v. Haney, 311 Pa. 144.

The judgment is affirmed.