Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 Pen. & W. 532

Road Case

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 15, 1831

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1831-06-15

<p>¡Neither the act of Assembly of 1809, nor that of 1815, authorises the appointment of reviewers, with power to vacate part of a road, which had never been opened and to lay out another in its stead.</p>

Decided 1831-06-15

Per Ctjriam,

¶1the report could not be sustained on the act of 18X5, which gives the viewers power to vacate the whole route, without giving them power to change the location in whole or in part. Nor could it be sustained on the act of 1809, which does give such a power, but only in relation to old roads completely opened; because the original road had been opened but in part. Had the inconvenience from opening it, been actually incurred, we should probably have heard nothing' of the present attempt by the owner of the soil to carry the road over a hill, to the detriment of the public, instead of permitting it to remain according to its present location, on the lev.el bank of the river. The report was, therefore, properly set aside.

Huston, J. dissented.

¶2Proceedings affirmed.

/2/penw/532 · .json · Public domain