Legal Opinion

Jones v. Schuylkill Light, Heat and Power Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 24, 1902No. Appeal, No. 345PublishedCited by 19 opinions

Appeal, No. 345, Jan. T., 1901, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. Schuylkill Co., July T., 1901, No. 4, on bill in equity in case of David A. Jones v. The Schuylkill Light, Heat & Power Company. Bill in equity for an injunction. Shay, J., found the facts to be as follows: From the evidence before us, it appears that, for the period of at least twenty-one years, the borough of Girardville has had a system of street lighting.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 345, Jan. T., 1901, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. Schuylkill Co., July T., 1901, No. 4, on bill in equity in case of David A. Jones v. The Schuylkill Light, Heat & Power Company. Bill in equity for an injunction. Shay, J., found the facts to be as follows: From the evidence before us, it appears that, for the period of at least twenty-one years, the borough of Girardville has had a system of street lighting. The ordinance book of the borough, offered in evidence, shows, that as early as March 5,1880, an ordinance was passed to prevent the interference with street lights,…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Fell,

The single question raised by this appeal is whether a resolution of a borough council accepting the bid of an electric light company to light the streets for five years, and directing the proper officials to execute a contract with the company, must be submitted to the chief burgess for his approval. The 3d section of the act of May 23, 1893, provides that: “ Every ordinance and resolution which shall be passed by council shall be presented to the chief burgess of such borough. If he approves he shall sign it, and if he shall not approve it he shall return it with…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Schenck v. BurgessSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
  2. Seitzinger v. Borough of TamaquaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
  3. Commonwealth ex rel. McChesney v. Diamond National BankSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Three Rivers Cablevision, Inc. v. City of PittsburghDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1980
  2. Long v. Lemoyne BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  3. Eddy v. Ashley BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  4. Commonwealth Ex Rel. v. BitnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  5. Wilkes-Barre Connecting Railroad v. Kingston BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935

14 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