Legal Opinion
Nelson v. Garland (City of Pgh.)
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided April 28, 1936No. Appeal, 196PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Keller, P. J.,
This action of mandamus is concerned with the Act of July 11, 1917, P. L. 818, relating to dogs and the protection of livestock and poultry from damage by dogs, etc., and the Act of May 11, 1921, P. L. 522, relating to the same general subject. It arises from a petition filed by the plaintiff, Olga Nelson, for a writ of mandamus requiring the defendants, the Council of the City of Pittsburgh and the City, to pay her the sum of |276.35 damages and costs to which she averred she was entitled under a certificate filed by John A. Joyce, alderman, with said City Council,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Grosjean v. American Press Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Frank v. MangumSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Smyth v. AmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Morgan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Covington & Lexington Turnpike Road Co. v. SandfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Commonwealth, Department of Environmental Resources v. Borough of CarlisleCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Armour Transportation Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- In Re the Habeas Corpus of LutkerCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1954
- McManus v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1938
- Glen Alden Coal Company CaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.