In the Case of a Road in Radnor & Newtown

5 Binn. 612, 1813 Pa. LEXIS 47
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided July 12, 1813·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Many objections have been made to the proceedings in this case, but we shall confine our opinion to one, namely, that Mr. Ewing, one of the petitioners, was appointed a reviewer, and signed the report which was confirmed by the Court. We make no doubt but this appointment was merely accidental. The Court did not happen to have the names of the petitioners before them, when they appointed the reviewers. But it was an irregularity which [613] cannot be overlooked. We are of opinion that this objection is fatal., and therefore the proceedings must be quashed.

Proceedings quashed.

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

In the Case of a Road in Radnor & Newtown, 5 Binn. 612, 1813 Pa. LEXIS 47 (Pa. 1813).

5 Binn. 612 (In the Case of a Road in Radnor & Newtown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ohio & Ross Township Road
31 A. 74 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1895)
In re County Bridge, Nescopeck Township
14 A. 419 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1888)
Epler v. Niman
5 Ind. 459 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1854)
Case of the Road from M'Claysburg
4 Serg. & Rawle 200 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1818)