Case ID: pa_154/html/0547-01.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

Keller’s Private Road. Benzenhoefer’s Appeal.
    
      Hoad law — Private road — Certiorari— Printing testimony — Practice.
    On certiorari to an order of the quarter sessions overruling exceptions to report of road viewers, the Supreme Court can review only the regularity of the proceedings, and cannot consider exceptions which raise only questions of fact. In such a ease it is useless to print the testimony.
    Argued Nov. 7, 1892.
    Appeal, No. 252, Oct. T., 1892, by John G. Benzenhoefer, from order of Q. S. Allegheny Co., overruling exceptions to report of road viewers.
    Before Paxson, C. J., Williams, McCollum, Mitchell and Beydrice, JJ.
    Petition of Joseph Keller for private road.
    To the report of the viewers, various exceptions were filed which raised only questions of fact. The court overruled the exceptions and confirmed the report.
    
      Error assigned was dismissal of exceptions.
    
      A. Blakeley, Andrew Fisher with him, for appellant.
    
      James Fitzsimmons, John S. Robb with him, for appellee.
    
      January 3, 1893 :
   Per Curiam,

The examination of this record fails to disclose error. It may not be out of place to remark that counsel can save their clients considerable expense by omitting to bring up and print the testimony taken in cases of this character. It does not come up legitimately, and therefore cannot be considered. The object of the certiorari is not to review questions of fact, but the regularity of the proceedings. For all that appears the proceedings below are regular, and are therefore,

Affirmed.