In the non-precedential decision in the case of Graffia v. Thomas, No. 1497 WDA 2023 (Pa. Super. Dec. 30, 2024 Murray, J, McLaughlin, J., and King, J.) (Op. by King, J.), the court affirmed a trial court’s verdict in a non-jury case following the entry of a default judgment against the Defendant.
In this non-jury trial matter, the trial court issued a verdict prior to rendering a decision on whether the rebuttal testimony of the Plaintiff’s expert was admissible.
The trial court ultimately found that the rebuttal testimony was admissible. As such, the trial court vacated its original verdict in order to take all of the evidence into consideration.
The trial court then issued a second verdict that was identical to the first verdict.
The Plaintiff appealed and argued that the trial court did not have the authority to vacate the first verdict after forty-three (43) days. The Plaintiff requested a new trial.
The Superior Court found that the trial court committed harmless error. The court noted that, since all of the evidence was taken into consideration prior to the rendering of the second verdict, the Plaintiff failed to demonstrate any prejudice.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this non-precedential decision may click this LINK.
I send thanks to Attorney Kasey E. Cahill of the Pittsburgh, PA office of Summers, McDonell, Hudock, Guthrie & Rauch P.C. for bringing this case to my attention.