Legal Opinion · Dissent

Chwatek v. Parks

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 24, 1972No. Appeal, No. 63 Tr. Dkt. 1971Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Judge Blatt:

I must respectfully dissent.

The majority opinion holds that an ordinance which incorrectly cites the statute under the authority of which it was enacted may not be cured by a subsequent amendment. In Scranton v. Engel, 39 Pa. Superior Ct. 534 (1909), the City of Scranton enacted an ordinance which provided that any pawnbroker engaging in business without a license would be subject to a fine of $200, and later amended the ordinance so as to reduce the fine to $100 when it was learned that the statutory authority to enact such an ordinance specifically provided…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Scranton v. EngelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909

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

Powered by the Exa API