Case Name: Road in East and West Nantmill townships, in Chester county
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1807-12
Citations: 4 Yeates 433
Docket Number: 
Parties: Road in East and West Nantmill townships, in Chester county.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (Yeates)
Volume: 4
Pages: 433–434

Head Matter:
DECEMBER TERM 1807,
AT PHILADELPHIA. FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT.
CORAM — TILGHMAN, CHIEF JUSTICE, YEATES, SMITH AND BRACKENRIDGE, JUSTICES.
Road in East and West Nantmill townships, in Chester county.
A certiorari to remove a road, must set out its beginning and ending, otherwise it will be quashed.
Certiorari directed to the Court of General Quarter Sessions of the peace of Chester county, to remove all proceedings respecting a road, beginning at a road leading from John Root’s to Thomas Bull’s mill, and extending to the Conestogoe road.
Mr. Frazer, in behalf of the road, moved to quash the certi-orari. It does not describe the road applied for and confirmed. *Its beginning only is set forth, which is an imperfect p description. It appears by the record, that the road petitioned for, begins on lands late of John Root, deceased, at the road leading from Bull’s mill, in East Nantmill, to the little Conestogoe road, near James Cubertson’s in West Nantmill, thence by the dwelling house of Tedlinger, to the road leading from Jones’s tavern to Pawling’s ferry on Schuylkill. It is therefore utterly defective, and could not legally remove the proceedings. For much smaller errors have certioraris been quashed. 1 Salk. 145, pi. 4. 146, pi. 9. 151, pi. 21.
Mr. T. Ross, e contra, contended,
that the present application came too late, the certiorari being returnable to March term 1806. The sessions understood the writ directed to them, and have returned the record.
Cited in 58 Pa. 57 to show that the Supreme Court will quash a certiorari that does not state the Beginning and ending of the road.

Opinion:
By the Court.
Unless the proceedings have been regularly removed, we have no jurisdiction over them. If the word extending in the writ, refers to the road prayed for, it is manifestly a false description; because the road applied for, extends to the road leading from Jones's tavern to Pawling's ferry. But if that word should have a different relation, then at best the beginning of the road is only described. The description therefore is clearly incorrect. The beginning and ending of the road should at least be set out in the writ of removal.
Let the certiorari be quashed.