Legal Opinion

Philadelphia, to Use v. Muller

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 17, 1928No. Appeal, 129PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Kephart,

This appeal is from a judgment directed to be entered for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in a sci. fa. sur municipal lien for street paving.. Appellant’s reasons for resisting the claim are, (1) that the street was originally paved by the West Philadelphia Passenger Bailway Co., thus relieving appellant’s property from further liability for repaving, and (2) the city, in accepting from the successor of the West Philadelphia Passenger Railway Co. a large sum of money in payment of the obligation to pave the street in front of appellant’s property,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Streilein v. VogelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
  2. Philadelphia ex rel. Mack v. EddlemanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
  3. Harper v. LukensSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  4. Hebb v. Kittanning Ins.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
  5. Philadelphia v. HaferSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. City of Philadelphia v. ShallcrossSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  2. Borough of Manheim v. OberSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  3. Erie's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  4. Indemnity Insurance Co. of North America v. McGuirk, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1930

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

Powered by the Exa API