Gail v. Philadelphia

Citations

• 273 Pa. 275
• 117 A. 69
• 1922 Pa. LEXIS 565

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Amendment—Statement of claim — Practice, G. P. —Statute of limitations — Waiver by laches — Exception—Appeal.</p> <p>1. An amendment to a statement of claim in a negligence case will not be permitted where the alteration proposed is a matter of substance, but, where there is no change in the cause of action, or substitution of a new party, an amendment will be allowed.</p> <p>2. In an action against a city for personal injuries resulting from a fall in a hole in a street, the statement may be amended after the running of the statute, by changing the street number of the house, opposite to where the hole was alleged to be located.</p> <p>3. Where such an amendment was allowed, without exception taken at the time, and without subsequent motion to strike it off, the defendant cannot at the trial raise the question of the propriety of the amendment by objection to testimony offered under it.</p> <p>Negligence — Damages — Personal injuries — Loss of earning power — Pain and, suffering — Practice, G. P. — Excessive verdict— New trial or reduction of verdict — Abuse of discretion.</p> <p>4. The remedy for excessive verdicts is by application to the trial court, where plaintiff can be given an opportunity to either accept a reduction or a new trial.</p> <p>5. A judgment will be reversed on appeal on account of an exorbitant verdict only where the impropriety of permitting it to stand is so clear as to show an abuse of discretion on the part of the court below in declining to sot it aside.</p> <p>6. The obligation to control the verdict is not limited to the trial judge, but extends to the court in banc, where it is the duty of all the judges sitting, not only to hear, but subsequently to meet together, discuss and determine the matters presented before them, and, where a majority feel convinced an exaggerated verdict has been rendered, the amount should be reduced, or a new hearing awarded, even though the trial judge disagrees.</p> <p>7. Where a plaintiff e