Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

NIRDLINGER v. SEIDEL. (04/21/58)

THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


April 21, 1958

NIRDLINGER, APPELLANT,
v.
SEIDEL.

Appeal, No. 49, March T., 1958, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Jan. T., 1955-C, No. 2899, in case of Maximilian Nirdlinger v. John M. Seidel, Sr. Order affirmed.

COUNSEL

Franklyn E. Conflenti, with him S. V. Albo, and M. E. Catanzaro, for appellant.

A. Leonard Balter, and Rubin & Balter, for appellee, were not heard.

Before Jones, C.j., Bell, Chidsey, Musmanno, Arnold, Jones and Cohen, JJ.

[ 392 Pa. Page 310]

OPINION PER CURIAM

Plaintiff, an architect, instituted an action in assumpsit in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County to recover commissions which the defendant allegedly agreed to pay him for his services. The case was submitted to a jury which returned a verdict for the plaintiff in the amount of $30,000. Defendant filed a motion for judgment n.o.v., which was refused by the court en banc, and for a new trial, which was granted for the principal reason that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. From the order of the court en banc awarding a new trial the appellant has taken this appeal.

A review of the record convinces us that the lower court did not abuse its discretion in granting the new trial and consequently its order must be affirmed.

Mr. Justice MUSMANNO dissents.

Disposition

Order affirmed.

19580421

© 1998 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.