Hill v. Oakmont Borough

Citations

• 47 Pa. Super. 261
• 1911 Pa. Super. LEXIS 145

Syllabus

<p>Road law — Change of grade — Damages—Witness—Evidence.</p> <p>1. In a proceeding to ascertain damages resulting from a change of grade of a borough street, the owner of the land is a competent witness to testify on his own behalf, where it appears that he had occupied the premises in question for eighteen years, that he knew the cost thereof, the improvements thereon and the prices at which his neighbors held their properties, and this is the case although he may not have been able to name the figure at which more than one property was sold at about the time the street was graded.</p> <p>2. In such a proceeding it is admissible to show what uses the property was capable of and how such uses were interfered with; that by the improvement the property had been made inaccessible or less accessible, and that it was less adapted to the purposes for which it was held than formerly. Thus the jury may take into consideration as one of the elements of damages the cost of constructing a retaining wall so as to save as much of the surface of the lot as could be preserved after the change of grade was effected.</p> <p>3. If the evidence does not fix a particular height of the retaining wall as necessary, the fact that one witness testifies that he thought a wall three feet* above the surface of the ground would be sufficient, does not prevent the plaintiff from showing the cost of a wall four feet above the ground.</p> <p>4. In a proceeding to assess damages for a change of grade of two borough streets at the intersection thereof, it is not necessary for the plaintiff to show the enactment of an ordinance authorizing the change of grade, where it appears that one of the streets was graded and paved by the borough and the other was graded to conform to the grade of the paved street.</p>