Schmitt v. City of Philadelphia

Citations

• 248 Pa. 124
• 93 A. 879
• 1915 Pa. LEXIS 525

Syllabus

<p>Practice, Supreme Court — Error not excepted to or assigned— Radical error — Erroneous order — Appeal—Condemnation proceedings — Collateral proceeding for costs.</p> <p>1. Ordinarily the Supreme Court will not consider an error which is not made the subject of exception or assignment, hut where there is a radical error patent on the face of the record, especially when the lower court has made a final order which cannot be executed and which in itself is erroneous, such error may he corrected on appeal in the absence of exception or. assignment.</p> <p>2. Where, pending an appeal from an award of viewers in condemnation proceedings, the ordinance appropriating the land in question and directing its condemnation is repealed, the court has no power in a collateral proceeding to determine what costs a land owner may recover, and in such proceeding a decree directing payment of such costs is so fatally erroneous that on an appeal therefrom the Supreme Court will correct such error, even where it is not made the subject of an assignment.</p>