Casey v. Canning

Citations

• 39 Pa. Super. 94
• 1909 Pa. Super. LEXIS 443

Syllabus

<p>Trespass — Pleading—Statement of claim, — Demurrer.</p> <p>1. In an action of trespass to recover damages for injuries to real estate, the statement of claim is not demurrable, if it avers occupancy of premises by plaintiff’s tenant, and also the fact that the premises had appurtenant thereto a certain construction and necessary appliances thereunto belonging of which plaintiff and the tenant long had peaceable use and quiet enjoyment, and the fact that defendant wrongfully, maliciously and injuriously deprived plaintiff’s premises of the use of the construction and appliances, to the injury of her reversionary estate,</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Judgment non obstante veredicto — Act of April 22, 1905, P. L. 286.</p> <p>2. Unless the amount of damages in an action of tort is agreed upon, or is admitted by the defendant, or is so clearly established by undisputed evidence that the court could give binding directions upon that matter, the court is not in a position on a motion for judgment for plaintiff non obstante veredicto, to determine what judgment, in its entirety, should be entered on the evidence, and hence is not in position to enter a judgment contrary to a verdict in favor of the defendant. There is nothing in the Act of April 22, 1905, P. L. 286, that contemplates the entering of an interlocutory judgment non obstante veredicto in favor of the plaintiff in an action of tort, to be followed by a writ of inquiry to assess the damages.</p> <p>3. Where in an action of tort the court entered judgment for plaintiff non obstante veredicto but for no specific amount of damages, the appellate court in reversing will direct that judgment shall be entered for the defendant on the verdict without prejudice, however, to the right of the plaintiff to appeal from such judgment.</p>