Scranton v. Koehler
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 12, Jan. T., 1900, by plaintiff in a suit of City of Scranton against Henry T. Koehler, from judgment of C. P. Lackawanna Co., in favor of defendant on case stated. Opinion by W. W. Porter, J. W. D. Porter, J., dissents. Case stated.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 12, Jan. T., 1900, by plaintiff in a suit of City of Scranton against Henry T. Koehler, from judgment of C. P. Lackawanna Co., in favor of defendant on case stated. Opinion by W. W. Porter, J. W. D. Porter, J., dissents. Case stated. The facts appear from the case stated as follows: 1. The city of Scranton is a city of the third class and governed by that legislation applicable thereto since April 4,1877. 2. On the 2d day of August, 1896, the city of Scranton passed an ordinance providing for paving Mulberry street from Mifflin avenue to Prescott avenue. There is also attached a…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
William W. Portee, J.,
The learned judge of the court below has written an exhaustive and able opinion. After a review of the cases in states other than Pennsylvania, he reaches this conclusion: “ Upon the strength of these authorities as well as upon principle, we should have no hesitation in holding that the method of making a local assessment, which they advocate, is, at least as a general rule the true one, and that is, that the improvement is to be treated as a whole, the whole cost of it being distributed among the properties abutting thereon, according to benefits, which, if…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Borough of Dunmore v. ConradSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Greene v. Woodlawn Borough, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Beaver County1923