Douds v. Beaver Valley Traction Co.

Citations

• 51 Pa. Super. 24
• 1912 Pa. Super. LEXIS 170

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Street railways — Alighting from car — New trial — Weight of evidence — Discretion of court — Damages.</p> <p>1. In an action against a street railway company by a woman to recover damages for personal injuries, the appellate court will not reverse the action of the trial court, after a verdict for plaintiff, in refusing a new trial because the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, where the plaintiff and two of her witnesses swear positively that the car had come to a full stop before the plaintiff attempted to alight, while many witnesses in the car and on the street testified that the car was in motion when plaintiff either fell, jumped or stepped off.</p> <p>2. The preponderance of evidence is not to be determined solely from the number of the witnesses; it is the peculiar province of the jury to determine the credibility of the witnesses and weigh the evidence.</p> <p>3. The court will take into consideration in refusing to grant a new trial, where the verdict is alleged to be against the weight of the evidence, that in two prior trials verdicts were also returned in favor of plaintiff.</p> <p>4. In an accident case where plaintiff’s witnesses contend that there was a fracture at the base of the skull, and the defendant’s that there was but a concussion of the brain, the case is for the jury to determine from such conflicting evidence, and from the other evidence in the case, the nature and extent of the injuries sustained, and the amount of damages which should be allowed therefor.</p>