Legal Opinion · Dissent

Irwin Borough School District v. North Huntingdon Township School District

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 27, 1953No. Appeal, No. 63Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Musmanno:

It is the position of the School District of the Borough of Irwin in these proceedings that (1) since the Court of Quarter Sessions had the power to determine the legality of the annexation ordinance it necessarily had the authority also to hear and determine other issues arising out of and incidental to the original determination; (2) that the amended decree was not interlocutory but final and therefore appealable; (3) that with the failure of the North Huntingdon School District to appeal from the amended decree, the decision of the Superior Court…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Peck v. JennessSupreme Court of the United States · 1849
  2. Grime v. Department of Public InstructionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  3. Commonwealth v. BrownmillerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  4. Park Brothers & Co. v. Oil City Boiler WorksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
  5. Delco Ice Manufacturing Co. v. Frick Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935

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