Perrot v. City of Philadelphia
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas, No. 1, of Philadelphia county: Of January Term 1876, No. 276. Assumpsit by Augustus Perrot to recover the value of services rendered to the city of Philadelphia as “ Superintendent of Music” in the public schools. The following case was stated for the opinion of the court:— “ By an act passed March 3d 1818 (Pamph. L. 124), ‘ the Controllers of Public Schools for the city and county of Philadelphia,’ were created and established.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas, No. 1, of Philadelphia county: Of January Term 1876, No. 276. Assumpsit by Augustus Perrot to recover the value of services rendered to the city of Philadelphia as “ Superintendent of Music” in the public schools. The following case was stated for the opinion of the court:— “ By an act passed March 3d 1818 (Pamph. L. 124), ‘ the Controllers of Public Schools for the city and county of Philadelphia,’ were created and established. “ By sect. 9 of this act the directors were vested with power ‘ to appoint teachers and provide all things necessary for…
1Opinion of the Court
The judgment of the Supreme Court was entered, March 5th 1877,
Per, Curiam.
— The law of this city is clear that no contract or debt can be created without the authority of the councils and an appropriation to meet it. The power to bind the city for debts or contracts was fully- examined in the case of The City v. Flanigen, 11 Wright 21 ; and the very question before us was in effect decided at the same term in The City v. Johnson, 11 Wright 382. The Act of 21st April 1858, is very pointed: “ That no debt or contract hereafter incurred or made shall be binding upon the city of Philadelphia…
2Cited by3 opinions
- TATE v. ANTOSHCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
- O'DONNELL v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Miller v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911