Legal Opinion

Schuylkill Haven Borough v. Bolton

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 10, 1959No. Appeal, No. 192PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Wright, J.,

We are here concerned with an action by the Borough of Schuylkill Haven against Oscar R. Bolton and Lilly Bolton to recover a penalty imposed by Ordinance No. 321 requiring owners of improved property *160to connect with the sewer system. The borough obtained judgment before a justice of the peace, and the Boltons appealed to the court of common pleas. That tribunal dismissed the complaint for want of jurisdiction, and we reversed on appeal. See Schuylkill Haven Borough v. Bolton, 181 Pa. Superior Ct. 364, 124 A. 2d 485. The case then proceeded to trial, and the jury returned…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Evans v. West Norriton Township Municipal AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  2. Hutchinson v. City of ValdostaSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  3. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Shumaker v. New York & Pennsylvania Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  4. Sterling v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  5. Putney v. Abington TownshipSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1954

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. SmallhooverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  2. Allegheny Ludlum Industries, Inc. v. CPM Engineers, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  3. Stewart v. Uniroyal, Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1974
  4. Commonwealth v. SmallhooverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API