Case Name: In the matter of the Petition of Harry Kozovsky et al.
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1932-10-10
Citations: 106 Pa. Super. 417
Docket Number: Appeal No. 345
Parties: In the matter of the Petition of Harry Kozovsky et al.
Judges: Before Tbexler, P. J., Kelleb, Gawtheop, Cunningham, Baldrige, Stadtfeld and- Parker, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports
Volume: 106
Pages: 417–419

Head Matter:
In the matter of the Petition of Harry Kozovsky et al.
Argued October 3, 1932.
Before Tbexler, P. J., Kelleb, Gawtheop, Cunningham, Baldrige, Stadtfeld and- Parker, JJ.
No appearance and no printed brief for appellant.
Joseph E. Lieberman, and with him Lester L. Dolfman, for appellee.
October 10, 1932:

Opinion:
Per Curiam:,
The regularity of the proceedings is challenged for the single reason that the report of the commissioners was not "made to the said court of quarter sessions at the next term" as provided by Act of May 23, 1874, P. L. 230, §2. This objection might prevail were it not for the fact that the court extended the time of making the report to the next succeeding term. There is an identical provision in the Act of June 13, 1836, P. L. 551, §1, relating to roads, and it has been the uniform practice of the courts upon proper application to extend the time for making the report, and this practice has been approved by our appellate courts; see Sewickley Township Boad, 26 Pa. Superior Ct. 572, and cases cited in 36 P. S. page 295. There is no reason why this provision in the act in question providing for the division of wards should be more strictly construed than the same provision in the road act above referred to.
Appeal dismissed at bar.