O'Hanlon v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.

Citations

• 256 Pa. 394
• 100 A. 972
• 1917 Pa. LEXIS 625

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Damages—Child—Loss of earning power — Street railways — Excessive verdict — New trial — Appeal — Practice, Supreme Court — Practice, C. P. — Act of May 20,1891, P. L. 101.</p> <p>1. It is the duty of the trial court to supervise the work of the jurors so as to prevent injustice, and to set aside a verdict when satisfied that it resulted from sympathy or prejudice.</p> <p>' 2. The power given to the Supreme Court to grant a new trial under the Act of May 20, 1891, P. L. 101, is exceptional, and will only be exercised to prevent palpable injustice, and never where there is room for an honest difference of opinion.</p> <p>3. The fact that a child when injured is so immature as to be without earning capacity does not deprive him of the right to recover for such loss of earnings as the jury may find from all the facts and circumstances he would, after reaching majority, sustain as a result of the accident.</p> <p>4. In an action by a seven-year-old child against a street railway company to recover for personal injuries a verdict for the plaintiff for $10,000 is not so glaringly excessive as to require the Supreme Court to grant a new trial, where it appeared that as a result of the injuries two amputations of the leg were necessary, that plaintiff sustained other minor injuries and a severe shock, and suffered great pain, $nd would in the future experience inconvenience in consequence of his crippled condition.</p>