Norristown Borough v. Puleo

Superior Court of Pennsylvania March 2, 1918

Norristown Borough v. Puleo, 69 Pa. Super. 265 (1918)

1918 Pa. Super. LEXIS 65

Head, Henderson, Kephart, Orlady, Porter, Williams

Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Henderson, J.,

Without reference to implied power express legislative authority is shown which sustains the action of the borough in enacting the ordinance under which the proceeding arose. The business of carrying on a junk shop is a proper subject of police regulation as is shown by Com v. Mintz, 19 Pa. Superior Ct. 283, and many other cases *271relating to business of a similar character. Boro. of Sayre v. Phillips, 148 Pa. 482; Philadelphia v. Brabender, 201 Pa. 574, and Scranton v. Straff, 28 Pa. Superior Ct. 258, show the application of the principle. The case was carefully considered and well decided in the court below. It is unnecessary to enlarge on the opinion of the learned trial judge.

The judgment is affirmed.

Reference

Cited By: 3 cases
Status: Published
Syllabus: Boroughs — Police powers — Junk dealer — ■License—Borough of Nomsiown. Under the special Acts of March 21, 1812, P. L. 235; April 2, 1831, P. L. 389, and April 7, P. L. 328, relating to the Borough of Norristown, that borough has the right under the police power to enact an ordinance to require a junk dealer to pay an annual license fee of ten dollars, and to provide a penalty for a violation of the ordinance.