Slagter v. Thrifty Clean, Inc.
This text of 272 A.2d 885 (Slagter v. Thrifty Clean, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinion
In this action a jury trial resulted in the entry of a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs-appellee by direction of the trial court. The defendant-appellant filed a motion for a new trial which was later dismissed. This appeal was then filed without a final judgment being entered in the court below. The appeal will be quashed.
We have repeatedly advised the profession that an order refusing a new trial is interlocutory and is unappealable. Cf. Bartkewich v. Billinger, 430 Pa. 207, 241 A. 2d 916 (1968), and cases cited therein. The appeal should not be filed and may not be entertained until a final judgment is entered. 1
*274 Appeal quashed. Costs on appellant.
Under the new Appellate Court Jurisdiction Act of 1970, §501(b) (effective September 11, 1970) the Court is given discretion to entertain an appeal from an interlocutory order given certain conditions. These conditions are not present here.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
272 A.2d 885, 441 Pa. 272, 1971 Pa. LEXIS 1119, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slagter-v-thrifty-clean-inc-pa-1971.