# Potts Et Ux. v. Guthrie

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · December 3, 1924 · 282 Pa. 200

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3852476

## Case

- **Full name:** Potts Et Ux. v. Guthrie, Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** December 3, 1924
- **Citations:** 282 Pa. 200; 127 A. 605; 1925 Pa. LEXIS 596
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Schaefer
- **Judges:** Schaefer, Moschzisker, Frazer, Walling, Simpson, Sadler, Schaeeer
- **Cited by:** 23 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3852476

## Opinion text

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Schaefer:
The size of verdicts which are being found in actions for damages for personal injury and death are becoming challenging in their proportions. Many of them would seem to embody the element of punishment in addition to compensation. The trial judge is as much a part of the tribunal created by the law to administer justice as is the jury and in cases of this kind he should be alert to see that sound judgment backs the finding of damages rather than feeling or prejudice. ■ If he fails to bring wise judgment to the determination of this most important question, the court in banc should strike down awards which are more than fairly compensatory. Being of opinion that the findings for both husband and wife in this case were much in excess of what they are fairly entitled to, I dissent from the affirmance of the judgments.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3852476. Public record. Not legal advice.