Harriott Avenue
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 122, April T., 1908, by Oil City, from order' of C. P. Venango Co., Nov. T., 1901, No. 2, sustaining exceptions to report of jury of view in the matter of change of grade of Harriott Auenue. Exceptions to report of jury of view. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Errors assigned were in sustaining exceptions to report of jury of view.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
W. D. Porter, J.,
Our inquiry must be confined to the questions presented by the record in this case, and it might have been well had the appellant printed the ordinance under which the work was done and the petition for the appointment of viewers to assess damages and benefits. We gather from the order appointing the viewers and their report, that Harriott avenue had been graded under the provisions of an ordinance approved August *5995,1871, that by an ordinance approved March 15, 1900, a new grade was establishedlñTThiFYoHióh of said avenue between Bissell avenue and Pearl avenue, and…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Hammett v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1869
- McDevitt v. People's Nat. Gas Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- McKeesport Borough v. FidlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Rafferty v. Central Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Morewood AvenueSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Grafius' RunSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906