Price v. Philadelphia Parking Authority

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Eagen :

I join in the cogent and unanswerable dissent of Mr. Justice Musmanno. However, I would further hold that at least in the case involving the Rittenhouse Square Project, the plaintiffs lack standing to prosecute the action.

A taxpayer’s suit lies only to prevent a wrongful expenditure of public funds or a wasting of public assets: *365Gericke v. Philadelphia, 358 Pa. 60, 44 A. 2d 233 (1945). The Majority opinion reasons that public assets are affected, because after fifty years or more ownership of the Rittenhouse Square Project property may revert to the…