City of Philadelphia v. Unknown Owner

24 A. 65, 148 Pa. 536, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1020
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 18, 1892·No. Appeal No. 45·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

It is sufficient to say in regard to the first and second specifications of error, that there is nothing upon the record which would have justified the court below in striking off the lien.

The remaining specification alleges that the court erred in refusing to make absolute the rule to open the judgment. There is nothing before us to show that the discretion of the court below was not properly exercised. The paving for which the claim was filed was done in 1875. The judgment had been obtained upon the claim more than ten years prior to the application to open.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

City of Philadelphia v. Unknown Owner, 24 A. 65, 148 Pa. 536, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1020 (Pa. 1892).

24 A. 65 (City of Philadelphia v. Unknown Owner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Philadelphia v. Dale
56 Pa. Super. 342 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1914)
Philadelphia v. Nell
31 Pa. Super. 78 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1906)
Philadelphia v. Smith
29 Pa. Super. 450 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1905)
Philadelphia v. Peyton
25 Pa. Super. 350 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1904)
Philadelphia v. Lukens
22 Pa. Super. 298 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1903)
Philadelphia v. Unknown Owner
20 Pa. Super. 203 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1902)