State Road
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 86, Jan. T., 1912, by the City of Philadelphia, from order of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., June Term, 1894, No. 1609, dismissing exceptions to report of referee In re Widening of State Road, Thirty-fifth Ward. Exceptions to report of Harold B. Beitler, Esq. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the ease. Errors assigned were in dismissing exceptions to report of referee.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Moschziskee,
The plaintiffs recovered damages for two strips of land five feet wide, claimed to have been taken from their property on each side of State road, formerly Aramingo street, in the widening thereof from fifty to sixty feet.
It appears from the evidence and the report of the referee that on June 26, 1856, the then owners of a large tract of land, of which the plaintiff’s property was a part, executed and recorded a deed-poll with a plan *143attached sub-dividing the tract into lots and streets and providing that the latter were “laid out and partially opened for the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Quicksall v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Commonwealth v. MooreheadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- City of Pittsburg v. Epping-Carpenter Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Commonwealth v. ShoemakerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Higgins v. Borough of SharonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Rahn v. HessSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- Milford Borough v. BurnettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Easton v. KochSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
- Pittsburgh v. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
- Kao v. HaldemanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.