Windber Telephone Co. v. Scalp Level Borough
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 105, April T., 1911, by appellant from decree of C. P. Cambria Co., Sept. T., 1911, No. 280, dismissing petition filed under the Act of April 17, 1905, P. L. 183 in case of Windber Telephone Co. v. Scalp Level Borough et al. Petition under Act of April 17, 1905, P. L. 183, to have determined the reasonableness of a license tax. Before O’Connoe, P. J. • The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was in dismissing the decree.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Rice, P. J.,
What we have said relative to the proceedings, and the manner in which they were conducted, in the two preceding cases, applies here. By an ordinance adopted in 1901, the Salix Telephone Company, to whose rights, duties and obligations the petitioner has succeeded, was granted a right to erect and maintain poles, etc., in the highways of the borough, and, by its acceptance of the ordinance, the company agreed to be “governed by all legal ordinances of a general nature now in force or that may hereafter be enacted.” The license ordinance, adopted in the following year,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Cochranton Borough v. Cochranton Telephone Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909