Hopper v. City of Pittsburg

Citations

• 5 Pa. Super. 41
• 1897 Pa. Super. LEXIS 188

Syllabus

<p>Boad law — Benefits cannot be set off against damages when found separately.</p> <p>Benefits amounting to $292 having been assessed against a property for grading of a street-, plaintiff appeals from the report of the viewers in not allowing him any damages, an issue being framed. The jury find that plaintiff had suffered damages to the extent of $500. On a rule for a mandamus execution held, that defendant was not entitled to set off and deduct the benefits from the damages; that the city’s claim for the benefits is a lien, a proceeding in rem upon which it must proceed regularly upon sci. fa. while if deducted from the verdict for damages the plaintiff would be compelled to pay it as if it were a personal charge.</p> <p>Boad law — Municipal improvements — Appeal from separate findings of viewers — Estoppel.</p> <p>A local municipal improvement may benefit abutting property in one way and damage it in another.</p> <p>Viewers being appointed to assess damages and benefits arising from grading, paving, etc., under the Act of May 16, 1891, P. L. 65, the viewers must report the damage and benefits separately. An appeal may be so taken as to secure an issue framed as to both questions, but 'there is nothing in the scope of the statute to prevent the parties, jvith consent of the court, from limiting the scope of the appeal to one of the questions and when the appeal is taken from failure to award damages the plaintiff is estopped from asserting that the appeal ipso facto superseded'and wiped out the benefit assessment.</p>