History
  • No items yet
midpage
Frederick Street
155 Pa. 623
Pa.
1893
Check Treatment
Per, Curiam,

There is nothing, of importance, in either of the twelve specifications of error, that is not sufficiently answered and satisfactorily disposed of in the opinion of the learned judge of the common pleas. The validity of the ordinance widening Frederick street was not an open question in this case: Hanover Borough’s Appeal, 150 Pa. 202. The viewers were appointed for the purpose of assessing damages and benefits resulting-from the laying out and widening of the street; and, as was said in Omega Street, 152 Pa. 129, it was the duty of all persons interested to appear before them and raise such questions of fact as they desired them to pass upon.

All the material questions, properly raised by the assignments of error, are rightly disposed of in the opinion referred to, and on that opinion the order, dismissing the exceptions and confirming report of the viewers, is affirmed with costs to be paid by the appellants.

Case Details

Case Name: Frederick Street
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Date Published: May 31, 1893
Citation: 155 Pa. 623
Docket Number: Appeal, No. 458
Court Abbreviation: Pa.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.