Davis v. Moore
Citations
- 50 Pa. Super. 494
- 1912 Pa. Super. LEXIS 84
Syllabus
<p>Public officers — Salary board — Board for assessment and revision of taxes — Appeals—Acts of March 81, 1876, P. L. 18, March 24, 1905, P. L. 47, and, April 4,1907, P. L. 58.</p> <p>1. Under the Acts of March 31, 1876, P. L. 13, and March 24, 1905, P. L. 47, the board for the assessment and revision of taxes of the county of Luzerne has a right to appeal from the decision of the salary board made in the exercise of the duties imposed on the latter by the Act of March 24, 1905, P. L. 47. Such an appeal lies under the Act of April 4, 1907, P. L. 58, inasmuch as the latter act was not repealed by the unconstitutional Act of March 4,1911, P. L. 10.</p> <p>Constitutional law — Sec. 6, art. Ill, of the constitution — Amendment and extension of acts.</p> <p>2. The sixth section of art. Ill of the constitution forbidding that a law be revived, amended, or the provisions thereof extended or conferred by reference to its title only relates to express amendments and does not require that every act shall recite all other acts that its operar tion may incidentally affect.</p> <p>3. When a system of procedure has been established in a class of cases, a new act applying such system to an additional class by general reference to it, is not unconstitutional, although it may operate to some extent to extend a previous statute.</p> <p>4. The Act of March 24, 1905, P. L. 47, may be construed so as to place the board for the assessment and revision of taxes under the same regulations as to the employment and compensation of clerks as are established by the Act of March 31, 1876, P. L. 13, with reference to subordinates in the county offices. Such a construction does not contravene sec. 6 of art. Ill of the constitution relating to the revival, amendment or extension of acts.</p> <p>Constitutional law — Special and local legislation — Classification of counties — Act of March 4, 1911, P. L. 10 — Salary board.</p> <p>5. The Act of March 4, 1911, P. L. 10, extending the provisions of th
Judges: Head, Henderson, Orlady, Porter, Rice
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
3 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Lloyd v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1896-07-15· cited 57×
- Commonwealth v. CollierSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1905-11-04· cited 17×
- James Smith Woolen Machinery Co. v. BrowneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1903-07-09· cited 15×
- Blankenburg v. BlackSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1901-10-21· cited 13×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.