Wade v. Oakmont Borough
Citations
- 165 Pa. 479
- 30 A. 959
- 1895 Pa. LEXIS 1029
Syllabus
<p>Boroughs—Municipal indebtedness—Division of boroughs—Special tax —Decree nunopro tunc—Acts of April 20, 1874, and June 1, 1887.</p> <p>Under the act of June 1, 1887, P. L. 285, relating to division of boroughs, a special tax by the new borough to meet a part of the indebtedness of the. old borough, must be preceded by the decree of the court. . The court of quarter sessions must define to what extent and within what limits that special power shall be exercised. Until the court has made such a decree, the borough councils cannot act.</p> <p>Where the court in the decree incorporating the new borough has failed to authorize a tax for the payment of a part of the debt of the old borough, and the councils of the new borough subsequently pass an ordinance providing for such a tax, the court of quarter sessions may amend its decree nunc pro tunc, and thus legalize the ordinance.</p> <p>An annual sum to be paid monthly for lighting the streets of a borough for a limited term is not the incurring of a new indebtedness within the meaning of the constitution, or of the act of April 20, 1874, P. L. 65.</p> <p>If the contracts and engagements of municipal corporations do not overreach their current revenues, no objections can be lawfully made to them, however great the indebtedness df such municipality may be, for in such ease their engagements do not extend beyond their present means of payment, and so no debt is created.</p>
Judges: Dean, Fell, McCollum, Mitchell, Sterrett, Williams
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
17 cases in this archive cite this case.
- City Council v. Dawson Waterworks Co.Supreme Court of Georgia· 1899-03-14· cited 84×
- Jackson v. Conneautville Borough School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1924-05-28· cited 28×
- Conrad v. PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1966-04-22· cited 27×
- Hawkins v. City of GreenfieldIndiana Supreme Court· 1967-10-17· cited 14×
- State v. City of MiamiSupreme Court of Florida· 1942-03-28· cited 13×
- Anderson v. International School District No. 5North Dakota Supreme Court· 1915-11-24· cited 10×
- Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. v. City of Sioux FallsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of South Dakota· 1904-07-11· cited 9×
- Moores v. Inhabitants of SpringfieldSupreme Judicial Court of Maine· 1949-02-28· cited 7×
- Black v. City of ChesterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1896-04-13· cited 5×
- City of Helena v. MillsNinth Circuit· 1899-05-02· cited 5×
- Spangler v. LeitheiserSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1897-07-15· cited 4×
- Muncy Electric Light, Heat & Power Co. v. Peoples' Electric Light, Heat & Power Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1907-06-25· cited 2×
- Consumers Education & Protective Ass'n, International, Inc. v. City of PhiladelphiaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 2002-09-18
- Mansfield Boro. School Dist. v. Mansfield High School Ass'nTioga County Court of Common Pleas· 1926-09-21
- Shamokin Banking & Trust Co. v. Coal Township Poor DistrictNorthumberland County Court of Common Pleas· 1929-08-14
- City of Chester v. WoodwardDauphin County Court of Common Pleas· 1929-09-12
- Lease of School BuildingsPennsylvania Department of Justice· 1940-11-12
Cites
2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.