Braddock Borough v. Allegheny County Telephone Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 44, April T., 1904, by defendant, from order of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., May T., 1903, No. 507, making absolute rule for judgment, for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, in case of Braddock Borough v. Allegheny County Telephone Company. Assumpsit to recover license fees. From the record it appeared that on February 6, 1894, the councils of the borough passed an ordinance “ Regulating poles and suspended wires and requiring the same to be licensed.”
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 44, April T., 1904, by defendant, from order of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., May T., 1903, No. 507, making absolute rule for judgment, for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, in case of Braddock Borough v. Allegheny County Telephone Company. Assumpsit to recover license fees. From the record it appeared that on February 6, 1894, the councils of the borough passed an ordinance “ Regulating poles and suspended wires and requiring the same to be licensed.” The plaintiff claimed that under this ordinance, the defendant company is indebted to it in a large sum for the license…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Smith, J.,
The nature of the charge imposed by a municipal ordinance on telegraph and telephone poles and wires does not depend on the descriptive term that may be applied to it. The charge *546is not- imposed in the exercise of the taxing power, for general revenue purposes, but in the exercise of the police power, to meet the expense arising from the duty of municipal supervision. Hence it is wholly immaterial whether the amount fixed for this purpose is designated as a license tax, a license fee, or a police charge. The only question that can be raised respecting it.is whether it is…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Borough of New HopeSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- New Hope Borough v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
3Cited by8 opinions
- Kittanning Borough v. Kittanning Consolidated Natural Gas Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Pittsburg & Allegheny Telephone Co. v. Braddock BoroughSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Kittanning Borough v. Garretts Run Gas Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Pottsville Borough v. Pottsville Gas Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
- New York & Pennsylvania Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. BoroughSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.