In re City of Allegheny
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 144, April T., 1898, by-Mary Dewar and Henry Landgraff, from decree of C. P., No. 2, Allegheny Co., JulyT., 1897, No. 658, appointing road viewers. Exceptions to report of viewers. Before C. P. No. 1, Allegheny County.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 144, April T., 1898, by-Mary Dewar and Henry Landgraff, from decree of C. P., No. 2, Allegheny Co., JulyT., 1897, No. 658, appointing road viewers. Exceptions to report of viewers. Before C. P. No. 1, Allegheny County. It appears from the record and evidence that this case arose on the petition of the city of Allegheny for the appointment of viewers to assess the benefits and damages arising from the grading, paving and curbing of Fulton street, between Adams street and Hudson street, in the city of Allegheny. Viewers were appointed and proceeded with the duties of their…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Smith, J.,
The question here involves the validity of an ordinance under which certain street improvements were made, the cost of which the city seeks to collect from the appellants. The *106legislative proceedings o-f the city councils relate to two ordinances. The first, introduced September 29, 1896, is as follows :
“ An Ordinance authorizing the grading, paving and curbing of Fulton street, from Adams street to Hudson street.. Sixth ward.
“ Section 1. Be it ordained, etc., That the Department of Public Works be and it is hereby authorized and directed to advertise for proposals for…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Fierst v. William Penn Memorial Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933