Legal Opinion

Erie v. Grant

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 19, 1902No. Appeal, No. 154PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal, No. 154, April T., 1902, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Erie Co., Sept. T., 1901, No. 149, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of City of Erie v. A Piece of Land, etc., and Ellen Grant’s Heirs, Owners or Reputed Owners, etc. Scire facias sur municipal lien for paving.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 154, April T., 1902, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Erie Co., Sept. T., 1901, No. 149, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of City of Erie v. A Piece of Land, etc., and Ellen Grant’s Heirs, Owners or Reputed Owners, etc. Scire facias sur municipal lien for paving. Before Walling, P. J. At the close of the plaintiff’s evidence the trial judge granted a compulsory nonsuit, for the reason that the assessment for the cost of the paving of Third street was based upon a contract, in which the contractors covenanted to keep the pavement in good repair for a period of ten years from…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

W. D. Porter,

The questions presented by this record are practically the same which have been considered in the case of City of Williamsport v. Hughes, ante, p. 443, and we do not regard it as necessary to supplement what we there said. There was a jury trial in the present case, and the court below entered a judgment of nonsuit, which it subsequently refused to take off; and from that order we have this appeal. The ordinance which authorized the improvement out of which this lien arose required an absolute covenant of guaranty, upon the part of the contractor, for the period of ten…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Erie City v. GrantSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904

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

Powered by the Exa API