Snyder County v. Wagenseller

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Snyder County v. Wagenseller

66 Pa. Super. 345, 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 263

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 16, 1917·No. Appeal, No. 14·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Orlady, P. J.,

The appellant frankly concedes that the question involved in this case has been decided by this court against his contention, in Kittanning Borough v. Mast, 15 Pa. Superior Ct. 51, and has been followed in Allentown v. Hartman, 22 Pa. Superior Ct. 400; Lehigh Co. v. Gossler, 24 Pa. Superior Ct. 406; Stroudsburg Boro. v. Shick, 24 Pa. Superior Ct. 442; but urges that these cases were erroneously decided and should be overruled.

We have carefully gone over the arguments presented, and find nothing therein to change our views from those expressed in the cases cited, and which were adopted by the court below in the opinion filed.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Opinion by

Orlady, P. J.,

The appellant frankly concedes that the question involved in this case has been decided by this court against his contention, in Kittanning Borough v. Mast, 15 Pa. Superior Ct. 51, and has been followed in Allentown v. Hartman, 22 Pa. Superior Ct. 400; Lehigh Co. v. Gossler, 24 Pa. Superior Ct. 406; Stroudsburg Boro. v. Shick, 24 Pa. Superior Ct. 442; but urges that these cases were erroneously decided and should be overruled.

We have carefully gone over the arguments presented, and find nothing therein to change our views from those expressed in the cases cited, and which were adopted by the court below in the opinion filed.

The judgment is affirmed.

Snyder County v. Wagenseller, 66 Pa. Super. 345, 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 263 (Pa. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

66 Pa. Super. 345 (Snyder County v. Wagenseller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related