Case ID: walker_3/html/0319-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam :", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ROAD IN UPPER TYRONE TOWNSHIP.
    After road reviewers have made report it is too late to except to the order to View, because by accident the seal of the Court had been omitted from the original order to view.
    Certiorari to Quarter Sessions of Fayette County.
    No 158
    July Term, 1883.
    On March 6,1882, a petition for a road was presented and viewers were appointed. On March 15, 1882, an ord'er to view was issued, but the seal of the Court was omitted by accident. The report of the viewers in favor of the road was filed June 6th, 1882. September 4, 1882, a petition for a review was filed. The report of reviewers against opening the road was filed on December 4,1882. On April 28th, 1883, exceptions to the report of the viewers were filed on the ground that the seal had not been affixed to the order. On May 19th, 1883, the Court overruled the exceptions and confirmed the report; which action forms the subject of the present certiorari to the Supreme Court.
    
      John Collins and Edward Campbell, Esqs., for plaintiff in error,
    cited : Blake vs. Fife, 27 Pitts, L. J., 225; Buchanan vs. Specht, 1 Phila., 252; Bryson’s Road, 2 P. & W., 207; Benjamin vs. Armstrong, 2 S. & R., 392.
    
      S. L. Mestremt, Esq., contra.
    
   The Supreme Court affirmed the decree of the Quarter Sessions on February 18th, 1884, in the following opinion,

Per Curiam :

There is an irregularity in this record, yet nothing incurably bad. There was an omission to affix the seal to the order to view, yet it was signed and otherwise duly attested by the Clerk of the Quarter Sessions. No motion was at any'time made to-quash the order by reason of the absence of the seal. Had it been made the Court might have ordered it to be affixed as of the date of its issue. The order to review had the seal of the Court duly affixed. After that was acted upon by the reviewers and returned to the Court it was too late to except to the original view on the ground that no seal was affixed to the order first issued.

Decree affirmed*