Skip to main content
· 1/3/1916

South Fork Borough v. Pennsylvania Railroad

Citations

  • 251 Pa. 261
  • 96 A. 710
  • 1916 Pa. LEXIS 454

Syllabus

<p>Constitutional law — Constitution of Pennsylvania — Local and special legislation — Municipal claims — Boroughs — Grading and paving of streets — Act of May 12, 1911, P. L. 288 — Railroads— Liens against railroad property.</p> <p>1. Tbe Act of May 12, 1911, JP. L. 288, empowering boroughs to pave puKtuTstreets ancTto assess ¿\\portion of the cost of the same on the owners of the properties abutting thereon, is not open to the objection that it is local, as it relates to all boroughs in the Commonwealth, or that it is special, as boroughs have frequently been recognized as proper subjects of classification, and is valid.</p> <p>2. The road bed and right of way of a railroad are exempt from assessment for municipal improvements, but such exemption does not extend to the stations, platforms, and other property of the railroad not absolutely necessary to the exercise of its franchises.</p> <p>3. The fact that a municipal lien for grading and paving, filed against the property of a railroad company may include ground on which is laid part of the roadbed and tracks of the railroad company, does not invalidate the lien. Judgment may be had on such a claim, but the purchaser at sheriff’s sale under the judgment, would take the land subject to the railroad company’s easement.</p> <p>4. In proceedings -against a railroad company for the enforcement of a municipal lien, it appeared that the lien included a strip of ground adjacent to the street, on which a station, shelter and platform were built, a portion of the right of way and tracks of the railroad company, ground occupied by a platform between the main and branch tracks and a track upon which dwelling houses, baggage rooms, and other buildings were located. The jury found a verdict for plaintiff for the amount of the claim, upon which judgment was entered. Defendant contended that more land was included in the claim than was subject to assessment and lien for street purposes. Held, that as the court would have control

Judges: Brown, Frazer, Mestrezat, Moschzisker, Potter, Stewart

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.