Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commonwealth v. Western Maryland Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 9, 1969No. Appeals, No. 53Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Me. Justice Robebts:

I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in Commonwealth v. Safe Harbor Water Power Corp., 423 Pa. 101, 109-112, 223 A. 2d *534223, 227-229 (1966), and I once again must dissent here.

Briefly summarizing my dissent in Safe Harbor, I there expressed the opinion that the “so far as possible” language clearly indicates that the Legislature intended the end-of-the-year time limitation to be directory only. The Safe Harbor rule, which allows the Commonwealth to be late only where the taxpayer caused the delay, is no rule at all,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Safe Harbor Water Power Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  2. Pennsylvania Railroad v. Board of Revision of TaxesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  3. Parker v. KrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API