717 OCTOBER TERM 1975 Appeal from the Judgment of the Court of Common Pleas, Trial Div., of Philadelphia at No. 799 September Term 1968
Pershing N. Calabro, Philadelphia, for appellant.
Francis E. Marshall, Philadelphia, for appellees.
Watkins, President Judge, and Jacobs, Cercone, Price, Van der Voort and Spaeth, JJ. Hoffman, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case. Cercone, J., concurs in the result.
[ 241 Pa. Super. Page 332]
This is an appeal from the denial of motions to remove directed verdicts and for a new trial.
On March 2, 1967, appellant was injured while loading corrugated cardboard into a trailer owned by his employer,
[ 241 Pa. Super. Page 333]
Frankford Paper Box Company (Frankford). Appellant and a co-worker, Holman Jefferson, were standing at the back of the trailer, preparing to remove a metal plate that had been laid across the space between the loading platform and the rear of the trailer. Unknown to either man, additional defendant Arthur Lester, also a co-worker of appellant, had hooked up a tractor to the trailer. As Lester started to pull the trailer away from the loading dock, appellant and Jefferson were thrown out of the trailer, appellant falling into the pit in front of the loading platform. As appellant attempted to scramble out of the pit, the tractor-trailer rolled back, pinning his legs and resulting in serious injury.
Appellant brought an action in trespass against Goldfine Truck Rental Service Co., Inc. (Goldfine), and Leonard and Anna Goldfine as owners and lessors of the tractor. Goldfine joined appellant's employer, Frankford, and the driver of the tractor, Lester, as additional defendants.
The matter was tried before a jury. The court directed a verdict in favor of each of the defendants and additional defendants. On January 14, 1975, following oral argument, appellant's post-trial motions were denied. This appeal followed.
[ 241 Pa. Super. Page 334]
It is well established that the party opposing the motion for a directed verdict is entitled to the benefit of all evidence favorable to him, and all reasonable inferences therefrom. McElhinny v. Iliff, 436 Pa. 506, 512, 260 A.2d 739, 741 (1970). "On a motion for a directed verdict, the facts must be considered in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion is made. . . . '[T]he court must accept as true all the evidence of that party which supports his contention . . . and must reject all the adverse testimony of the party seeking a directed ...