Legal Opinion

Starkey v. Philadelphia

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 24, 1959No. Appeals, 289 and 290PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Bell,

The plaintiffs, instituted this action in Equity in which they claimed a reversionary interest in certain lands taken by the City in eminent domain proceedings.

The plaintiffs contended that the City never acquired a fee simple title but only a base or determinable fee; that the lands were condemned for airport purposes and are now not used for airport or any other public purpose; that the City now proposes to convey the lands to private persons for private industrial purposes and has therefore abandoned any public use of these lands; and that the limited or base fee…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Belovsky v. Redevelopment AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  2. Dornan v. Philadelphia Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  3. London v. KingsleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  4. Slegel v. LauerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
  5. Parks v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. In re The Appeal of Neshaminy Auto Villa Ltd.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  2. Basehore v. Hampden Industrial Development AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  3. Captline v. County of AlleghenyCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  4. Fleck v. Universal-Cyclops Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  5. In re Condemnation by the Commonwealth, Department of TransportationSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API