In re Berg
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
APPEALS BY PETITIONEES EROM THE COURT OE QUARTER SESSIONS OE ALLEGHENY COUNTY. Nos. 89, 90 October Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, Nos. 1182, 1184 March Term 1890, Q. S. On February 4,1890, Henry Berg and Daniel Ritter filed separate petitions, in due form and accompanied by proper bonds, for a license to sell liquors at retail under the act of May 18, 1887, P. L. 108, on Railroad Avenue, in Verona borough.
Read the full summary
APPEALS BY PETITIONEES EROM THE COURT OE QUARTER SESSIONS OE ALLEGHENY COUNTY. Nos. 89, 90 October Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, Nos. 1182, 1184 March Term 1890, Q. S. On February 4,1890, Henry Berg and Daniel Ritter filed separate petitions, in due form and accompanied by proper bonds, for a license to sell liquors at retail under the act of May 18, 1887, P. L. 108, on Railroad Avenue, in Verona borough. On March 27, 1890, John R. Cribbs and others filed remonstrances against the granting of the prayers of the petitioners, setting out the provisions of the act of April 9, 1870, P. L.…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee, Cueiam:
There was an appeal in each of the above cases from the *358refusal of the court below to grant the petitioner a license to sell liquors at retail. The appeal is a substitute for a certiorari, and brings up nothing but the record. That shows the petition and the refusal of the court below to grant the license. The reasons for such refusal are not material. They do not properly form any part of the record.
Affirmed.
2Cited by5 opinions
- Branch & Power's LicenseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Free's LicenseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
- Indian Brewing Co.'s LicenseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Lippincott's LicenseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Edmonson's LicenseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1914