Legal Opinion

Swarthmore Boro. v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 17, 1924No. Appeal, No. 251PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Sadler,

The Borough of Swarthmore granted to a street railway company permission to build its line on a public highway therein known as Yale Avenue, and its rights, and obligations as well, have now passed to the Phila. Rapid Transit Company, the defendant here. Certain conditions were attached to the grant, including a provision that the street occupied should be “telforded or macadamized to a depth of twelve inches when completed, as the highway committee may direct for its full width and full length from curb line to curb line, and at all times be kept in good order.”…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Swarthmore Borough v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  2. Allegheny v. Millville, Etna & Sharpsburg Street Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
  3. Reading v. United Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
  4. Collingdale Boro. v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  5. Borough v. Chambersburg & Gettysburg Electric Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Easton v. Washington County InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  2. Dorn v. Stanhope Steel, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  3. Brobston v. Darby BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  4. Pennsylvania Railroad v. Pennsylvania-Ohio Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  5. Moore v. WhittySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929

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