Pittsburg & Allegheny Telephone Co. v. Braddock Borough

Citations

• 43 Pa. Super. 456
• 1910 Pa. Super. LEXIS 73

Syllabus

<p>Constitutional law — Title of act — Trial by jury — Delegation óf legislative power — Telephone and telegraph companies.</p> <p>1. The Act of April 17, 1905, P. L. 183, entitled, “An Act providing for the determination by the Court of Common Pleas of the proper county of all disputes as to the reasonableness of the amount of license fees between municipal corporations and telegraph, telephone or light or power companies,” is not unconstitutional. It does not violate the provision of the constitution relating to the title of statutes; nor does it violate the provision of the constitution relating to the trial by jury; nor does -it delegate legislative power to the courts.</p> <p>Municipalities — Trial by jury — Constitutional law.</p> <p>2. A municipality does not belong to the class whose rights to trial by juryare guaranteed by art. I, sec. 6, of the constitution of Pennsylvania.</p> <p>Telegraph and telephone companies — Practice, C. P. — Findings of fact.</p> <p>3. In a proceeding under the Act of April 17, 1905, P. L. >183, to determine the reasonableness of a license fee imposed by a municipality upon a telephone company, the findings of fact by the court have the same conclusive force and effect as the verdict of the jury, save only in cases of manifest and flagrant error on the part of the court.</p> <p>Telephone and telegraph companies — Res judicata — Reasonableness of ordinance.</p> <p>4. An adjudication by the court of common pleas of the reasonableness of a license fee imposed by a municipality upon a telephone company is not res judicata of a similar proceeding between the same parties several years thereafter. Conditions may have so changed in the meantime as to render an ordinance reasonable at the time of its passage unreasonable and oppressive at the time of the second proceeding.</p>