Blankenburg v. Black
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 301, Jan. T., 1901, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. No. 3, Philadelphia County, June T., 1901, No. 4322, on bill in equity in case of Rudolph Blankenburg et al. v. Hugh Black et al. Bill in equity for an injunction.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 301, Jan. T., 1901, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. No. 3, Philadelphia County, June T., 1901, No. 4322, on bill in equity in case of Rudolph Blankenburg et al. v. Hugh Black et al. Bill in equity for an injunction. This was a bill filed by appellants, Rudolph Blankenburg and Samuel Sartain, as citizens, voters, owners of real estate, and taxpayers, residing in the city and county of Philadelphia, and Rinaldo A. Lukens and Simon Gratz, the present incumbents in office of the board of revision of taxes, appointed by the court of common pleas of Philadelphia county on March 5,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Mitchell,
Two technical objections to the bill may be first noticed.
There are some superfluous parties. The two plaintiffs who are office holders have a special interest. While there is no vested title in an office not protected by the constitution, yet the holders have a special interest not to be deprived of it by unconstitutional means. They could, however, defend their possession after the election, and if the bill were filed by them alone it would be a sufficient answer to refer them to their remedy at law. But as the bill is brought in behalf of taxpayers, the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lloyd v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
3Cited by13 opinions
- Suermann v. Hadley, Treas. (White)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Minsinger v. RauSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Gregory v. CockrellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
- Dixie Fire Insurance v. American Confectionery Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1910
- Beltz v. PittsburgSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.