Charleroi Borough v. Bailey

Citations

• 54 Pa. Super. 331
• 1913 Pa. Super. LEXIS 64

Syllabus

<p>Road law — Paving—Grading—Borough—Acts of April 88,1889, P. L. 44, May SI, 1897, P. L. 114, and May 8, 1909, P.'L. 888 — Petition of two-thirds of owners — Votes of three-fourths of councils.</p> <p>1. A borough ordinance approved October 23, 1908, imposing a special assessment upon property owners for grading, paving and curbing a street, will not support a valid municipal claim, where it appears that no petition had been presented to councils by owners of abutting property for paving the street.</p> <p>2. The Act of April 23, 1889, P. L. 44, confers no jurisdiction upon a borough to assess property for the cost of grading a street; nor can councils impose a special assessment for paving a street, except, as required by the act of 1889, on the petition of two-thirds of the owners of property representing not less than two-thirds in number of feet of the properties fronting or abutting on the street.</p> <p>3. A borough ordinance under the Act of May 31,1897, P. L. 114, for the paving of part of a street, 499 feet in length, and connecting parts of the street already payed and approved, is not valid unless it was voted for by three-fourths of the members of council. A vote of five out of seven couneilmen comprising the councils is insufficient.</p> <p>4. The Curative Act of May 3,1909, P. L. 383, does not apply to an assessment made under an invalid ordinance where it appears that part of the assessment was for grading a street; nor is it applicable where the borough does not file a claim as provided by the curative act setting forth “the date of the assessment for which the lien is filled.” The requirement that the claim must state when the assessment was made, is mandatory.</p>