Legal Opinion
Hanek v. Cities of Clairton
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Decided March 16, 1976No. Appeals. Nos. 1051 C.D. 1974 and 221 C.D. 1975PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
President Judge Bowman,
Immediately prior to January 1, 1973, Fred Hanek (Hanek) and Benjamin Lustman (Lustman), residents of Pittsburgh employed within the neighboring municipalities of Neville Township (Township) and West Mifflin Borough (Borough), respectively, were within the classes of taxpayers subject to the following taxes on wages:(1) the 1% Pittsburgh City wage tax, imposed pursuant to the authority contained within The Local Tax Enabling Act (Enabling Act) J(2) the 1 % Township wage tax (Hanek) and the 1% Borough wage tax (Lustman), both imposed pursuant to the Enabling…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Murray v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
- Prichard v. Willistown Township School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
- Pennsylvania Co., Etc., Trustee, CaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
3Cited by9 opinions
- City of Harrisburg v. School District of HarrisburgCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- Dunmire v. Applied Business Controls, Inc.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Radman v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Berks County Tax Collection Committee v. Pennsylvania Department of Community & Economic DevelopmentCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- School District v. City of PittsburghCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.