Edgewood Borough v. Scott
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 246, April T., 1905, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Allegheny Co., July T., 1902, No. 61, on verdict for defendant non obstante veredicto in case of Edgewood Borough v. Philip Scott. Appeal from justice of the peace. Before Rodgers, J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was in entering judgment for defendant non obstante veredicto.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Porter, J.,
This action to recover the penalty imposed by a borough ordinance for digging a trench in a street for the purpose of laying pipes to carry natural gas, without having obtained a permit or certificate authorizing said excavation to be made, was commenced before a justice of the peace, from whose judgment the defendant appeals. There was at the trial in the court below no dispute as to the facts, and the jury rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant, “ subject to the question of law reserved, to-wit, whether there is any evidence which…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Sayre Borough v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Kittanning Borough v. Kittanning Consolidated Natural Gas Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Borough of Warren v. GeerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1887
- City of Allentown v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Johnson v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1869
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Indiana Railway Co. v. CalvertIndiana Supreme Court · 1907
- Collins v. Public Service CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Peters v. Colonial Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Commonwealth v. KennedySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Pottsville Borough v. Pottsville Gas Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.