Legal Opinion

Nurdlinger v. Irvine ex rel. Commonwealth

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 12, 1886PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Error to the Common Pleas, No. 3, of Philadelphia County to review a judgment for the Commonwealth, plaintiff, upon a case stated in the nature of a special verdict, for the opinion of the court. The following facts appeared by the case stated. First.

Read the full summary

Error to the Common Pleas, No. 3, of Philadelphia County to review a judgment for the Commonwealth, plaintiff, upon a case stated in the nature of a special verdict, for the opinion of the court. The following facts appeared by the case stated. First. The above defendants (plaintiffs in error first case) •are now and have been since January 1, 1884, the lessees and managers of the Chestnut street theater and the Chestnut street opera house, both located in the city and county of Philadelphia ; and as such lessees and managers the said defendants have carried on both of said theaters, and have…

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam :

These three cases were argued together. The main question therein is common to all of them.

We concur in the construction put upon the statute relating to the time for which the licenses were authorized to be granted. It would be a forced interpretation to hold that they were to be effective for more than one year, or at more than, one place in the county.

The payment of a fine for a violation of the law is no legal bar to the right of the treasurer to collect the license fees.

Judgment affirmed in each case.

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Csanyi v. CsanyiNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1921

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API