Commonwealth v. Parsons
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 288, Jan. T., 1906, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Lackawanna Co., May T., 1906, No. 63, on quo warranto in case of Commonwealth ex rel. W. R. Lewis, District Attorney, v. William Pax-sons. Quo warranto to determine title to the office of school controller in the city of Scranton.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 288, Jan. T., 1906, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Lackawanna Co., May T., 1906, No. 63, on quo warranto in case of Commonwealth ex rel. W. R. Lewis, District Attorney, v. William Pax-sons. Quo warranto to determine title to the office of school controller in the city of Scranton. Edwards, P. J., handed down an opinion, the material portion of which was as follows: Did the councils have the right to designate the annexed territory as the twenty-second ward ? This is a question somewhat difficult of solution. The city of Scranton became a second-class city in 1901. At that…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
It is conceded that judgment of ouster was properly entered against the defendant for the reasons that there was no properly constituted ward of the city of Scranton that he could represent as a school controller, and that there was no election district in which votes could be cast for him for this office. Whether the additional reason given by a majority of the court that the Act of April 28, 1903, P. L. 332, is both unconstitutional and void for uncertainty can be sustained, is a question not requiring decision at this time.
The judgment is affirmed.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Powell v. ScrantonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909