Case ID: pa_152/html/0134-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Me. Justice Williams,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Amberson Avenue. Childs’s Appeal.
    Appeal No. 217, Oct. T., 1892, by A. H. Childs et al., from decree of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Aug. T., 1891, No. 82, dismissing exceptions to report of viewers. Heard with preceding case.
    The facts are similar to those of the preceding case. The exceptions, filed by appellants, property owners, were among others as follows:
    “ 5. The assessments made are for the alleged costs, covering expenses of the alleged improvements instead of the value of the work alone, and also includes the costs of the grading of said street a second time.”
    
      Error assigned was entry of decree dismissing exceptions and confirming report, quoting decree.
    
      Knox £ Reed and A. W. Smith, who did not take part in the argument, for appellants.
    
      William O. Moreland, for appellee.
    
      January 3, 1893:
   Opinion by

Me. Justice Williams,

The fifth exception to the report of viewers heard in the court below should have been sustained and the report recommitted or set aside. The defect is apparent on the face of the report, and for reasons given in an opinion filed at the present term in Travers’s Appeal [the preceding case] the court below should not have confirmed the report.

The decree is now set aside at the costs of the appellee and a procedendo awarded.