Borough v. Carmer

Citations

• 169 Pa. 426
• 32 A. 422
• 1895 Pa. LEXIS 1109

Syllabus

<p>Road law — Method of determining location of road.</p> <p>The proper method of determining the location of a road originally laid out by viewers is to ascertain the starting point, and the location of the middle line; then to determine the width of the road as laid out and opened, and finally to locate the outer boundaries of the road by measuring one half the width of the road each way from the middle line.</p> <p>Municvpal lien — Sidewalks.</p> <p>A borough constructed a sidewalk about two hundred and eighty feet long, and filed a lien for the cost. The owner who had neglected to build after proper notice, defended on the ground that a thin wedge at one end of the walk an inch or two inches wide at the base, and running to a point a few feet away, was over the line of the street, and for this reason no part of the sidewalk which was not over the line could be recovered for. The court charged that if any part of the sidewalk that the plaintiff notified the defendant to build on the line indicated in the notice would have to be constructed outside of the street as actually opened, the borough could not recover. Held, that the instruction was erroneous, as it left no room for the application of the maxim de minimis, and no power to distinguish between what was done rightly, and what was thought to be objectionable: Railway Co. v. Allegheny City, 92 Pa. 100; Fell v. Philadelphia, 81 Pa. 59 ; Commissioners of Kensington v. Keith, 2 Pa. 218, distinguished.</p>