Commonwealth ex rel. Braughler v. Weir
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 301, Oct. T., 1894, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Indiana Co., June T., 1894, No. 68, refusing suggestion for quo warranto. Quo warranto.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 301, Oct. T., 1894, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Indiana Co., June T., 1894, No. 68, refusing suggestion for quo warranto. Quo warranto. Before White, P. J. The suggestion for the quo warranto recites that the defendant is exercising the ofSee of burgess of Indiana borough without lawful right, that such borough was incorporated many years ago by special law and became regularly subject to the general borough law of April 3, 1851; that the relator was elected chief burgess of such borough, Feb. 20,1894, being the annual election for borough and township officers, under the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Green,
We think this case is controlled by our decision in the case of Quinn v. Cumberland County, 162 Pa. 55. The considerations which ruled that case so far as the question here involved is concerned, are entirely applicable to this. We there held that the Act of 11th May, 1893, P. L. 44, which was a general law applicable to all the boroughs of the commonwealth, enabling borough councils to establish boards of health, repealed the special law of 28th January, 1873, applicable only to the borough of Carlisle, making provision for the same subject. Our decision was based…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Quinn v. Cumberland CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Commonwealth v. McCombsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
3Cited by43 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MoirSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Suermann v. Hadley, Treas. (White)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Richie v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Lloyd v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Milford Township Supervisors' RemovalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.