In re change of Grade of Chatham Street

43 A. 365, 191 Pa. 604, 1899 Pa. LEXIS 861
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMay 23, 1899
DocketAppeal, No. 89
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 43 A. 365 (In re change of Grade of Chatham Street) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re change of Grade of Chatham Street, 43 A. 365, 191 Pa. 604, 1899 Pa. LEXIS 861 (Pa. 1899).

Opinion

Pee Cubiam,

This proceeding, by petition to the court below under the act of May 16,1891, was for the purpose of assessing damages done to the petitioner’s property, fronting on Gaul street, by reason of the change of grade of Chatham street.

Prior to said change of grade, petitioner’s lots were drained, through two connecting alleys appurtenant to said lots, into Chatham street. The elevation of the grade on Chatham street rendered drainage into it impossible, and petitioner was thus compelled to provide other means of drainage.

There cannot be any question as to his legal right to compensation ; and we cannot say that the amount awarded him is excessive. As to his legal right, etc., it is unnecessary'’ to do more than refer to section 8 of article 16 of the constitution, and the act under which this proceeding was had.

The constitutional provision is not limited to property abutting or fronting on the particular highway or improvement, by [606]*606the construction or enlargement of which the property is injured. It applies to any works, etc., that are sufficiently near to the property to make the injury proximate, immediate and substantial: Mellor v. Philadelphia, 160 Pa. 614; In re Melon Street, 182 Pa. 397; Snyder v. Lancaster, 20 W. N. C. 185.

Property is injured when its drainage is materially affected: Railroad Co. v. Ziemer, 124 Pa. 560; Chambers v. South Chester, 140 Pa. 510. See also Patton v. Philadelphia, 175 Pa. 88, and Dawson v. Pittsburg, 159 Pa. 317.

There is nothing in either of the assignments of error that requires special notice. Neither of them is sustained.

The decree of the court below, dismissing exceptions to the report of the viewers, and confirming said report, is affirmed at appellant’s costs, and its appeal is dismissed.

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

Related

Branyon v. Kirk
191 So. 345 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1939)
Locust Street Subway Construction
177 A. 599 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1934)
Kunkle v. Ford City Borough
175 A. 422 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1934)
Cavanaugh's Petition
21 Pa. D. & C. 191 (Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas, 1934)
Bodemer v. County of Northampton
101 Pa. Super. 492 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1930)
Robertson v. New Orleans & G. N. R. Co.
129 So. 100 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1930)
Holmes v. Public Service Commission
79 Pa. Super. 381 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1922)
Burdsall v. Lansdowne Borough
68 Pa. Super. 215 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1917)
Ogontz Avenue
73 A. 1096 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1909)
Shinzel v. Bell Telephone Co.
31 Pa. Super. 221 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1906)
Robinson v. Norwood Borough
27 Pa. Super. 481 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1905)
Cooper v. Scranton City
21 Pa. Super. 17 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1902)
Stork v. City of Philadelphia
45 A. 678 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
43 A. 365, 191 Pa. 604, 1899 Pa. LEXIS 861, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-change-of-grade-of-chatham-street-pa-1899.