Legal Opinion · Dissent

Interstate Cemetery Co. Appeal

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 27, 1966No. Appeal, 209Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Cohen:

I disagree with the majority opinion for several reasons. First and foremost, I believe that my colleagues have entirely disregarded the very nature of sovereign power. It is settled law in Pennsylvania that, “The power of eminent domain is an attribute of sovereignty, and every private owner holds his property subject to the right of the sovereign to take the same, or such part of it as may be required to serve the public use.” Philadelphia Olay Company v. York Clay Company, 241 Pa. 305, 308-9, 88 Atl. 487 (1913). This being so, I would find that the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Contributors to the Pennsylvania Hospital v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
  2. Philadelphia Clay Co. v. York Clay Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
  3. Lakewood Memorial Gardens, Inc. AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  4. Hinnershitz Cemetery Co. v. Miller, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Berks County1939

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

Powered by the Exa API