Commonwealth v. Foster
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 140, Jan. T., 1905, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Lebanon Co., June T., 1905, No. 10, refusing mandamus in case of Commonwealth ex rel. The Edison Electric Illuminating Co. v. Charles Foster, Controller of the City of Lebanon. Petition for mandamus. Before Ehrgood, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Error assigned was refusal of mandamus.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Bbown,
Appellant’s application in the court below was for a writ of mandamus to compel the appellee, controller of the city of Lebanon, to certify on a contract for furnishing electric light to the city the appropriation against which the expenditures under the contract are to be charged, and to counter*179sign two warrants drawn for light furnished under it. Judgment was entered for the respondent on the demurrer to his return and the petition was dismissed. There are, therefore, no facts in dispute.
The city of Lebanon is a city of the third class, and the duties which the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- City of Harrisburg v. SheplerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
3Cited by5 opinions
- Empire Voting Mach. Co. v. City of ChicagoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1920
- Coleman v. StevensonCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- D. N. Corporation v. RoudabushSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Kingsley v. City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1952
- Edwin E. Hollenback, Inc. v. HadleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933