Case ID: f-supp_198/html/0616-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "GRIM, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re Appointment of Viewers to Assess Damages on Account of the Appropriation by the City of Bethlehem of PROPERTY OF Irving FOX, Trustee, Situated in the TOWNSHIP OF HANOVER, COUNTY OF NORTHAMPTON, Commonwealth of PENNSYLVANIA. In re MONOCACY PARK, CITY OF BETHLEHEM, PA. In re The Taking, Appropriation, and Acquisition, by the Right of Eminent Domain, of Lands of Harold S. Campbell, Martha M. Campbell, Harold S. Campbell, Jr., Jean D. Campbell, Kathleen L. Campbell, Jo Ann Campbell, and Irving Fox, Situate in Hanover Township, County of Northampton, by City of Bethlehem, for the Purpose of Extending and Enlarging City’s Public Park Known as Monocacy Park.
    Civ. A. Nos. 25670, 25929.
    United States District Court E. D. Pennsylvania.
    Oct. 6, 1961.
    See also 181 F.Supp. 880.
    Louis J. Goffman and Michael Temin, Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen, Philadelphia, Pa., for Irving Fox, trustee, petitioner.
    Daniel L. McCarthy, City Sol., Bethlehem, Pa., Richard P. Brown, Jr., and Don B. Blenko, Morgan, Lewis & Bocki-us, Philadelphia, Pa., for City of Bethlehem.
   GRIM, Judge.

The City of Bethlehem has filed exceptions in both of these cases to the schedule of damages exhibited by the viewers and to the report of the viewers. In support of its exceptions the City advances three contentions.

The City’s first contention is that these cases belong not in this court but in the state court. This matter has been decided previously, against the City.

The second contention is that Irving Fox, Trustee, is not the party to whom an award should be made. This, too, has been decided previously, against the City.

The third contention is that the damages should not have been fixed by the viewers at $385,000. Since the award of the viewers has been appealed from, the propriety of the amount must be determined in further proceedings in this court, and not by a ruling on exceptions.

Order

And now, October 6, 1961, the exceptions of the City of Bethlehem are dismissed. I make no ruling on the propriety of the amount awarded.