Summary
In Granowitz v. Erie Redevelopment Authority, 432 Pa. at 245, 247 A.2d at 624, it was held, relying on Rankin v. McCurry, 402 Pa. 494, 166 A.2d 536 (1961), as follows: " 'A verdict winner complaining of trial errors to secure a new trial must convince the trial court that the verdict in his favor did not cure the errors and that the errors produced an unjust result.
Summary of this case from Grinn et ux. v. Redev. A. of New CastleOpinion
October 8, 1968.
November 12, 1968.
Practice — New trial — Error in abstract — Verdict winner complaining of trial errors.
1. An error in the abstract is not sufficient to warrant a re-trial. [245]
2. A verdict winner complaining of trial errors must show that the verdict in his favor did not cure the errors and that the errors produced an unjust result. [245]
3. In this condemnation case, in which it appeared that plaintiff property owner, the verdict winner, appealed after the refusal of a new trial; that the only error asserted was the refusal of the court below to admit evidence at the trial of an offer to purchase the premises; and that plaintiff did not maintain that the jury's award was inadequate; it was Held that a new trial was properly refused.
Mr. Justice ROBERTS concurred in the result.
Mr. Justice MUSMANNO did not participate in the decision of this case.
Before BELL, C. J., MUSMANNO, JONES, COHEN, EAGEN, O'BRIEN and ROBERTS, JJ.
Appeal, No. 190, March T., 1968, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Erie County, Sept. T., 1966, No. 711, in case of Jacob Granowitz v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Erie. Judgment affirmed.
Appeal by plaintiff property owner from award of board of viewers. Before McCLELLAN, J.
Verdict for plaintiff; motion by plaintiff for new trial denied and judgment entered on verdict. Plaintiff appealed.
John M. Wolford, with him T. P. Dunn, and Dunn, Wolford Sesler, for appellant.
John M. Quinn, with him Quinn, Plate, Gent, Buseck Leemhuis, for appellee.
Jacob Granowitz, the appellant, was the owner of improved real estate, which was totally condemned on August 19, 1966, by the Redevelopment Authority of Erie, the city where the real estate was located. The Board of Viewers awarded damages in the sum of $120,000. Granowitz appealed to the Common Pleas Court and, after trial, a jury awarded damages in the amount of $132,000. Following denial of a motion for a new trial and entry of judgment on the verdict, he appealed to this Court.
The only asserted assignment of error is that the court below erred in refusing to admit evidence at trial of the amount of an offer made to purchase the premises "in 1962, 1963 or 1964." Granowitz does not here, nor did he in his motion for a new trial below, maintain that the jury's award was inadequate. Under such circumstances, Rankin v. McCurry, 402 Pa. 494, 166 A.2d 536 (1961) is controlling.
In Rankin, supra, at 494, 495, we said: "The appellants alleged significant errors in the charge concerning the issue of damages, but they did not demonstrate or even attempt to demonstrate that their recovery was adversely affected by the alleged errors . . . .
"It is well-settled that error in the abstract is not sufficient to warrant a retrial. Siegfried v. Lehigh Valley Transit Co., 334 Pa. 346, 349, 6 A.2d 97 (1939). A verdict winner complaining of trial errors to secure a new trial must convince the trial court that the verdict in his favor did not cure the errors and that the errors produced an unjust result."
Judgment affirmed.
Mr. Justice ROBERTS concurs in the result.
Mr. Justice MUSMANNO did not participate in the decision of this case.