Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

DARLENE WRIGHT v. DAVID ENGLE (07/12/78)

decided: July 12, 1978.

DARLENE WRIGHT, APPELLANT (AT NO. 731),
v.
DAVID ENGLE, APPELLANT (AT NO. 730)



No. 730 October Term, 1977 No. 731 October Term, 1977, Appeal from the Judgment of the Court of Common Pleas, Civil Division, - in Trespass, of Potter County at No. 695 of 1974.

COUNSEL

R. T. Mutzabaugh, Bradford, for appellant, at No. 730, and appellee, at No. 731.

Harold B. Fink, Jr., Coudersport, for appellant, at No. 731, and appellee, at No. 730.

Watkins, President Judge, and Jacobs, Hoffman, Cercone, Price, Van der Voort and Spaeth, JJ. Watkins, former President Judge, did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Author: Cercone

[ 256 Pa. Super. Page 323]

These appeals arise from a trespass action for damages caused when appellant-defendant's automobile struck the plaintiff's vehicle from behind. A jury, in the Common Pleas Court of Potter County, returned an itemized verdict for the appellee-plaintiff as follows:

"Loss of earning power - $20,000.00

Pain and suffering - 7,000.00

Medical bills - 3,140.60"

After defendant moved for a new trial, the lower court judge denied the motion subject to a remittitur of $2,110.20 to be filed by the plaintiff. The remittitur was filed, but defendant refused to pay the verdict. Plaintiff's motion to withdraw the remittitur was denied. Defendant appeals on the denial of the motion for new trial. Plaintiff cross appeals on the denial of the withdrawal of remittitur. We affirm the lower court.

In dealing with the defendant's appeal of whether the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a new trial, we are faced with three questions: first, whether the issues raised were properly preserved for appeal; second, whether the lower court erred in charging on the impairment of earning power; third, whether the jury verdict was excessive in light of the evidence presented.

I.

The law of Pennsylvania is that a specific exception must be taken at the trial level in order to preserve an issue for appeal. Dilliplaine v. Lehigh Valley Trust Co., 457 Pa. 255, 332 A.2d 114 (1974). In the case before us, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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