Phœnixville Borough v. Eyrich
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 11, Oct. T., 1909, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Chester Co., April T., 1907, No. 20, on verdict for defendant in case of Phoenixville Borough v. Calvin R. Eyrich. Appeal from judgment of burgess. Before Hemphill, P. J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. The court gave binding instructions for defendant. Verdict and judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned was in giving binding instructions for defendant.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
The plaintiff borough duly enacted an ordinance, the first section of which is as follows: “It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or offer for sale at retail upon the streets of the borough, or from house to house, any goods, wares or merchandise of any kind, or of any meat, fish, groceries, provisions, or foods of any kind except milk, without first obtaining a license or permit for such purposes from the burgess.”
The learned counsel for the appellee contends that this was an invalid exercise of the power of the borough to legislate upon such matters. The existence…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Sayre Borough v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Commonwealth v. KebortSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Mechanicsburg Borough v. KoonsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
3Cited by7 opinions
- Commonwealth v. PennisiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Mechanicsburg Borough v. GraySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Borough of Schuylkill Haven v. Manbeck, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Schuylkill County1935
- Borough of Temple v. General Baking Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Berks County1934
- Commonwealth v. McKendryMontgomery County Court of Quarter Sessions · 1934
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.