Perot's Appeal
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, No. 3, of Philadelphia county: Of January Term 1877, No. 208. In equity. This was the appeal of T. Morris Perot and others, citizens and taxpayers of the city of Philadelphia, from the decree of the court refusing an injunction against William B. Mann, prothonotary of the Courts of Common Pleas of Philadelphia county.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, No. 3, of Philadelphia county: Of January Term 1877, No. 208. In equity. This was the appeal of T. Morris Perot and others, citizens and taxpayers of the city of Philadelphia, from the decree of the court refusing an injunction against William B. Mann, prothonotary of the Courts of Common Pleas of Philadelphia county. The bill alleged in substance: That in the 7th section of the 5th article of the constitution of Pennsylvania, which went into effect January 1st 1874, it is provided as follows, viz.: “For Philadelphia there shall be one prothonotary’s…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Agnew
The question in this case is a very plain and simple one. What is the interpretation to be given to the penultimate clause of the seventh section of the fifth article of the constitution of 1873, relating to the pay of the prothonotaries ? The whole section reads thus: “ For Philadelphia, there shall be one prothonotary’s office, and one prothonotary for all said courts, to' be appointed by the judges of said courts, and to hold office for three years, subject to removal by a majority of the said judges; the said prothonotary shall appoint such assistants as may be necessary and authorized by…
2Cited by1 opinion
- McCleary v. Allegheny CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894