Appeals, Nos. 107, 108 and 109, March T., 1963, from judgments of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, July T., 1961, Nos. 3677, 3681 and 3772, in cases of Frank Garella, doing business as Garella's Cafe v. Redevelopment Authority of Allegheny County; Theodore A. Tsuris, Frank Garella, doing business as Garella's Cafe v. Same; Theodore A. Tsuris v. Same. Judgments affirmed.
William H. Mendlow, for appellant.
Sylvan Libson, for appellee.
Emil W. Herman, with him Rothman, Gordon and Foreman, for appellee.
Before Bell, C.j., Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O'brien and Roberts, JJ.
OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE JONES
Theodore A. Tsuris (Tsuris) owned certain property Located on North Duquesne Avenue, Duquesne City, Allegheny County, upon which property, inter alia, was a three-story brick building, a portion of the floor of said building being leased for a ten year term commencing May 1, 1957 to Frank Garella (Garella). The leased premises, rented at $170 monthly, were used by Garella - a liquor licensee - for restaurant purposes.
By two resolutions - February 26, 1959 and September 28, 1959 - the Redevelopment Authority of Allegheny County (Authority) condemned Tsuris' entire property. Subsequent to the condemnation, viewers, after hearing, filed a report awarding $72,000 to Tsuris and $6,400 to Garella. From that award, all three parties - Tsuris, Garella and the Authority - appealed to the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. Three separate actions were filed in that court: Garella (lessee) v. the Authority (3677 July Term, 1961), Tsuris (owner) v. the Authority (3722 July Term, 1961) and Tsuris and Garella (owner and lessee) v. the Authority (3681 July Term, 1961). The three cases were consolidated for trial and, after a trial before a judge and jury, three separate verdicts were rendered, the overall effect of said three verdicts being that the jury awarded to Tsuris, the owner, damages plus detention allowance totaling $75,075 and no damages to Garella, the lessee.*fn1
In all three actions, Garella moved for a new trial. The Court en banc, by a three-one vote with WEISS, J., dissenting without opinion, dismissed Garella's motions and directed the entry of judgments on the verdicts. From each judgment, Garella has appealed.
In Garella's appeal from the judgment entered in Tsuris v. Authority, Tsuris has filed a motion to quash the appeal ...