Livingston v. Wolf

Citations

• 136 Pa. 519
• 27 W.N.C. 5
• 20 A. 551
• 1890 Pa. LEXIS 1048

Syllabus

<p>1. The foot ways, no less than the carriage ways, in cities and boroughs, are under municipal control; and the authorities may determine the extent to which the sidewalks may be obstructed by cellar doors, doorsteps, awnings, bay-windows, cornices and the like.</p> <p>2. This power must be exercised under regulations that are general and uniform, that are reasonable and certain, and that are in conformity with the constitution and the laws: Paul v. Carver, 26 Pa. 223; Kneedler v. Norristown, 100 Pa. 368; Reimer’s App., 100 Pa. 182.</p> <p>3. Under regulations that are reasonable in character and general in their application, cities and boroughs have power to permit the use of portions of the highways for approaches to and for ornamental work upon buildings standing on the street line.</p> <p>4. A borough ordinance authorizing the use of 3 feet 6 inches of the foot way for cellar entrances, and prohibiting bay-windows projecting more than 28 inches, on a street 60 feet wide, is not unreasonable; and under it an over-hanging balcony and bay-window projecting less than those limits will not be enjoined.</p> <p>5. If the conclusion in this case could be regarded as doubtful, the decree dismissingthe bill of an adjoining owner for an injunction, wouldnevertheless be affirmed upon the finding of the master that the structures complained of caused no appreciable injury to the plaintiff.</p>