finding damage award of$15,000 excessive where woman complained of knee and back pain but there was no objective medical evidence, no evidence of permanency, no evidence of lost earning capacity, and whose out-of-pocket expense were only $535
How later courts described this case
- finding damage award of$15,000 excessive where woman complained of knee and back pain but there was no objective medical evidence, no evidence of permanency, no evidence of lost earning capacity, and whose out-of-pocket expense were only $535
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Dissenting Opinion by
Price, J.:
There is no doubt that an appellate court will generally not reverse unless the verdict is so grossly excessive as to shock the appellate court’s sense of justice. This, is particularly so where the verdict has been sustained by the lower court. The trial judge, Judge Gerald A. GLEESON, JR., of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, in reviewing the jury’s verdict and denying post-trial motions, was not shocked. Nor was the trial judge able to find the verdict excessive because of the jury’s sympathy, prejudice or bias. Nor was the trial judge able to declare the verdict excessive as totally unrelated to the extent or type of injury involved.
After a review of this record I can only agree with the lower court. Perhaps as a juror or as a trial judge without a jury I would have reached a different result, but this is not the test to be applied upon appellate review.
I would affirm the entry of judgment in the full amount of the'$15,000.00 verdict.