In re Opening of Parkway
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 283, Jan. T., .1914, by thé Pennsylvania Mutual Life Insurance. Company, from decree of Q. S., Philadelphia Co., Sept. Sess., 1912, No. 25, granting leave to the City of Philadelphia to file a bond in eminent domain proceedings, in the matter of the opening of the Parkway from 16th and Arch streets to Appletree street, in the 10th ward of the City of Philadelphia.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 283, Jan. T., .1914, by thé Pennsylvania Mutual Life Insurance. Company, from decree of Q. S., Philadelphia Co., Sept. Sess., 1912, No. 25, granting leave to the City of Philadelphia to file a bond in eminent domain proceedings, in the matter of the opening of the Parkway from 16th and Arch streets to Appletree street, in the 10th ward of the City of Philadelphia. Petition by the City of Philadelphia for leave to file a bond to secure the damages caused by the opening of a parkway. Before Barratt, J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. The court granted the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Mestrezat,
By an ordinance approved by the mayor of the City of Philadelphia on July 3, 1912, entitled an ordinance to take, use and appropriate certain properties for the parkway and to authorize the opening of a certain part of the parkway and the éntering of security for the payment of damages therefor, it was ordained by section 1 of the Ordinance that under the authority of the act of assembly approved June 8, 1907, P. L. 466, the city appropriate certain described pfopérty for the purposes of the parkway. Section 2 of the ordinance provides that “the director of the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Pennsylvania Mutual Life Ins. v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
- Brown v. County CommissionersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1853
- Smedley v. ErwinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1866
- Seaman v. Borough of WashingtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Seifried v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Rutherford Water Co. v. Harrisburg.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Matthews v. LomasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Pennsylvania Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. CuylerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Commonwealth v. Superintendent of House of CorrectionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Philadelphia v. Peter E. Costello & Sons, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.