Legal Opinion

Kunz v. Titusville

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 25, 1953No. Appeal, 299PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Horace Stern,

This appeal involves once again the question whether a given activity of a municipality partakes of the nature of a governmental or a proprietary function; if the former, the municipality is immune from tort liability ; if the latter, if is legally responsible for injury caused by the negligence of its employes.

Plaintiff conducted a business of collecting garbage and rubbish from business places in the City of Titus-ville and hauling it to an incinerator plant owned and operated by the city. On the occasion in question he took such a load to the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Scibilia v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  2. Briegel v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
  3. Honaman v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  4. Hill v. Allentown Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  5. Brogan v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Kelly v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  2. Nehrbas v. Incorporated Village of Lloyd HarborNew York Court of Appeals · 1957
  3. Boorse v. Springfrield TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  4. Spang & Co. v. USX Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  5. Quinones v. TOWNSHIP OF UPPER MORELAND, ETC., PA.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1960

10 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