City of Chester v. Phila., Reading & Pottsville Telegraph Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 250, Jan. T., 1892, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Delaware Co., for plaintiff, for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence. Assumpsit to recover license fees for maintenance of telegraph poles. The statement filed was to recover license fees of $1 per pole per annum imposed by city ordinance.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 250, Jan. T., 1892, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Delaware Co., for plaintiff, for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence. Assumpsit to recover license fees for maintenance of telegraph poles. The statement filed was to recover license fees of $1 per pole per annum imposed by city ordinance. Defendant’s affidavit of defence was to the effect that: (1) plaintiff had no authority in law to impose such tax ; (2) the telegraph poles erected and maintained by the defendant in the city of Chester were not the subjects of taxation for revenue purposes by the plaintiff ; (3)…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
This case is ruled by Telegraph Co. v. The city of Philadelphia, 22 W. N. C. 39, and City of Allentown v. Western Union Telegraph Co., decided herewith.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by6 opinions
- City of McKeesport v. McKeesport & Reynoldton Passenger Railway Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Alachua County v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1999
- City of Pensacola v. Southern Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1905
- New Hope Borough v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Borough of North Braddock v. Central District & Printing Telegraph Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.