McMarlin v. Butler Borough

Citations

• 41 Pa. Super. 20
• 1909 Pa. Super. LEXIS 4

Syllabus

<p>Road law — Widening street — Petition—Estoppel—Borough.</p> <p>1. Where a property owner in signing a petition for grading and paving a street believes on information that the street was of a particular width, but makes no representation to the borough to that effect, and it turns out that the street is of a less width, and some of the petitioner’s property is taken, the latter is not estopped from subsequently recovering damages for the land taken.</p> <p>Road law — Paving—Cartway—Sidewalk—Release of damages — Act of April 23,1889, P. L. 44.</p> <p>2. Where the petition of a property owner for the grading, curbing and paving of a street distinctly states that the proceeding is under the Act of April 23, 1889, P. L. 44, and contains a release of damages, the release applies only to damages in connection with the grading and paving of the cartway, and will not prevent the petitioner from recovering damages for a subsequent change of grade of the sidewalk. The act of April 23, 1889, relates only to the paving, curbing and macadamizing of streets. The word “grading” while not mentioned in the act, is an incident to paving.</p> <p>3. Whilst it may be conceded that the term “street” in its broadest significance, includes the sidewalk as well as the cartway, it has long been the policy of the law to distinguish between them, and to recognize that as to the former, the rights and responsibilities of the owner of property are quite different from those enjoyed or imposed on him in relation to the latter, or the street as that word is used and understood in the common speech of the people.</p>