Keller v. Scranton
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 365, Jan. T., 1901, by defendants, from decree of C. P. Lackawanna Co., Jan. T., 1901, No. 1, on bill in equity in case of Luther Keller v. City of Scranton, the Lackawanna Railway Company and the Scranton Railway Company. Bill in equity for an injunction.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 365, Jan. T., 1901, by defendants, from decree of C. P. Lackawanna Co., Jan. T., 1901, No. 1, on bill in equity in case of Luther Keller v. City of Scranton, the Lackawanna Railway Company and the Scranton Railway Company. Bill in equity for an injunction. From the record it appeared that on November 17, 1900, the councils of the city of Scranton passed an ordinance providing for the construction of a viaduct over the tracks of the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railway Company. The. court in an opinioii by Kelly, J., found, inter alia, the following facts: 7. The erection of the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Mitchell,
The general scheme of the constitution with regard to the *588amount of municipal indebtedness is clear. Section 8 of article 9 divides such indebtedness into three classes considered with reference to amount, first, debt exceeding seven per cent of the assessed value of taxable property, which is absolutely prohibited, except as to cities whose debt exceeded seven per cent at the time of the adoption of the constitution; second, new debt or increase of indebtedness by the municipal authorities, which is permitted to the extent of two per cent of assessed value; and…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Chostkov v. City of PittsburghDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1910
- Coleman v. Borough of New KensingtonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania · 1905
- Walters v. Tamaqua Borough, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Schuylkill County1927