Volume 79 — Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports

<p>Public Service Company Law — Public Service Commission — Water companies — Bates—Bate restrictions incorporated in charter —Begulation—Jurisdiction of Public Service Commission.</p> <p>The regulation of rates, to be charged for service by a water company, is under the control of the Public Service Commission exercising the delegated police powers of the Commonwealth.</p> <p>It is immaterial that the act of assembly creating the company contained a provision limiting the amount to be charged for such service.</p> <p>The same authority which authorized the rate in the charter of the water company has, by subsequent legislation, established a general method for determining the reasonable rates which such corporation might collect. If the proviso in the charter of the water company was regulatory, it was an exercise of authority by the legislature which has since been transferred to the Public Service Commission, and is not different in its nature and effect from the order of the commission fixing a rate. The enactment of the Public Service Company Law repeals such regulatory legislation, because it is inconsistent with the whole scheme and process of public service legislation.</p>

<p>Appeal, No. 289, Oct. T., 1921, by Commonwealth, from judgment of Q. S. Phila. Co., March Sessions, 1921, No. 690, granting a motion in arrest of judgment in the case of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Henry Belevsky.</p> <p>Indictment for sedition under the provisions of the Act of June 26, 1919, P. L. 639. Before Smith, P. J., 34th Judicial District, specially presiding.</p> <p>The opinion of the Superior Court states the case.</p> <p>The jury rendered a verdict of guilty. The defendant filed motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment.</p> <p>The court dismissed the motion for a new trial and granted the motion in arrest of judgment, for the reason set forth in the opinion of the Superior Court. Commonwealth appealed.</p> <p>Error assigned was the order of the court.</p>

<p>Lateral railroads — Proceedings to construct — Abandonment— Bight to abandon — Approval of court — Equitable and .just terms— Decree of court — Insufficiency—Act of May 5,1882, P. L. 501 — Act of April 6,1869, P. L. 17.</p> <p>Under the provisions of the Act of May 5,1832, where proceedings to construct a lateral railroad had been commenced, the petitioners could abandon the same after the report of viewers was filed or after the verdict of a jury, by paying the legal costs to be taxed, and filing a declaration of their intention to abandon.</p> <p>The Act of April 6, 1869, P'. L. 17, amending the earlier act, permitted the petitioners to abandon, upon the payment of the costs and the filing of the declaration of intent in the court having jurisdiction, which court might set aside and terminate all previous proceedings “upon 'terms equitable and just to all parties in interest.”</p> <p>.Where, by reason of the institution of a proceeding to construct a lateral railroad, the defendant was put to expenses amounting to over $1,000, which was averred in the answer to the petition to abandon, the replication that such expenses were for counsel fees and experts, is no reason why they should be wholly borne by the defendant. An order of the court which approves such petition, but which does not give the reasons for relieving the petitioners of such costs, does not terminate the proceeding, “upon terms equitable and just to all the parties in interest,” and will be reversed.</p>

<p>Appeal, No. 31, Oct. T., 1921, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Blair County, Jan. T., 1920, No. 64, on verdict for plaintiff, in the case of Paul C. Harter v. Altoona and Logan Valley Electric Railway Company.</p> <p>Trespass to recover damages for injuries to plaintiff’s automobile. Before Baldrige, P. J.</p> <p>The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.</p> <p>Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, in the sum of $282.67. Defendant appealed.</p> <p>Errors assigned were refusal to give binding instructions for defendant, and refusal of defendant’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto.</p>

Appeal, No. 112, Oct. T., 1921, by plaintiff, from judgment of Municipal Oourt of Philadelphia, April T., 1920, No. 86, on verdict for defendant, in the case of James Donald v. George W. Parker, Jr. Trespass to recover for damages to plaintiff’s automobile. Before Bonniwell, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. The court directed a verdict for the defendant upon which judgment was subsequently entered. Plaintiff appealed.

Appeal, No. 45, Oct. T., 1921, by defendant, from judgment of O. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., March T., 1920, No. 4673, on verdict for plaintiffs, in the case of Betty Idell, a minor, by her next friend and father, Morris Idell, and Morris Idell, in his own right, v. Elbert O. Day. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Rogers, J. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case.

Appeal, No. 187, Oct. T., 1921, by defendant, from judgment of Q. S. Phila. Co., Oct. Sessions, 1920, No. 715, on verdict of guilty, in the case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Harry S. Jeffery. Indictment for libel.

Appeals, Nos. 64 and 65, Oct. T., 1921, by defendant, from judgment of the Municipal Court of Philadelphia, Feb. T., 1919, Nos. 289 and 290, in favor of plaintiffs in cases tried by the court without a jury in suits of Antonio Franchinia and Dinoto D. Battiso v. Frank Palumbo. Assumpsit to recover the value of wearing apparel stolen from the plaintiffs while guests at a hotel. Before MacNeille, J., without a jury. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.

Appeal, No. 16, March T., 1922, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Lackawanna Co., Oct. T., 1920, No. 1090, discharging rule to open judgment and awarding an issue in the case of Vaughan & Company v. John U. Hopewell. Buie to open judgment.

Appeal, No. 205, Oct. T., 1921, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Chester Co., Jan. T., 1921, No. 126, on verdict for plaintiff, in the case of J. H. B. McGowan v. City of Coatesville. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Butler, P. J. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for $525, on which judgment was entered. Defendant appealed.

Appeal, No. 46, March T., 1922, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Wayne Co., March T., 1918, No. 1, on verdict for plaintiff in case of School District of Berlin Township v. School District of Damascus Township. Assumpsit to recover cost of tuition furnished by plaintiff’s school district to pupils living in defendant’s school district. Before Newcomb, J., 45th Judicial District, specially presiding. Verdict for plaintiff for $244.02 and judgment thereon.