Skip to main content
· 1/6/1913

Pittsburgh v. Grenet

Citations

  • 238 Pa. 567
  • 86 A. 462
  • 1913 Pa. LEXIS 1012

Syllabus

<p>Cities of the second class — Collector of delinquent taxes — Compensation — Ordinances—Statutory remedy — Jurisdiction Common Pleas — Act of June 20, 1901, P. L. 586 — Act of May 8,1909, P. L. 477-</p> <p>1. Under the provisions of the Act of June 20, 1901, P. L. 586, providing that the collector of delinquent taxes in cities of the second class should be the head of the department of delinquent taxes and that “the head of this department shall receive such compensation, either by a stated salary or by fees, as may be fixed by councils” and the provisions of the Act of May 8, 1909, P. L. 477, providing that the collector of delinquent taxes in such cities “shall receive such compensation, either by a stated salary or by fees, as may be fixed by councils” the councils of the City of Pittsburgh had power to fix the compensation of the collector of delinquent taxes by a percentage of the penalty imposed upon delinquent taxpayers.</p> <p>2. In an action of assumpsit brought by the City of Pittsburgh against a collector of delinquent taxes to recover moneys alleged to have been illegally retained by the defendant, it appeared that the defendant had been appointed collector on April 5, 1909, and that after his appointment he had collected and accounted for the delinquent taxes and water rents upon the basis of compensation to himself at a certain percentage of the penalties collected, doing this under the provisions of the ordinances of the city of March 6, 1906, and of October 14, 1909. The accounts of the collector were duly audited and approved at stated times by the controller of the city. The contention of the city in the suit was that the defendant was entitled to an annual salary of $5,000 in accordance with the Act of March 7, 1901, P. L. 20, and that, therefore, he was indebted to the city in a certain sum representing the excess of percentage of penalties retained by him over said salary. Held, that the suit was improperly brought as, if the city had any righ

Judges: Brown, Elkin, Mestrezat, Moschzisker, Potter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.