Culver v. Commonwealth
Decision Date | 03 January 1944 |
Docket Number | 201 |
Citation | 348 Pa. 472,35 A.2d 64 |
Parties | Culver v. Commonwealth, Appellant |
Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
Argued November 23, 1943.
Appeal, No. 201, January T., 1943, from order of C.P Crawford Co., Feb. T., 1941, No. 48, in case of Rodney Culver v. Commonwealth. Order, as modified, affirmed.
Proceeding upon petition and rule, in eminent domain proceeding, for payment of costs and interest.
Rule made absolute, opinion by KENT, P.J. Commonwealth appealed.
Order as modified, affirmed.
Phil H Lewis, Deputy Attorney General, with him H. Ray Pope, Jr., J. Perry Eckels, and James H. Duff, Attorney General, for appellant.
No appearance was made or brief filed for appellee.
Before MAXEY, C.J., DREW, LINN, STERN, PATTERSON and STEARNE, JJ.
This appeal by the Commonwealth is from an order of the learned court below directing the payment of interest on a verdict obtained against it in an eminent domain proceeding.
The action arose through the condemnation of .38 of an acre of land of appellee, Rodney Culver, by the State Department of Highways, in the improvement of State Highway No. 82, section 8, in Vernon Township, Crawford County. Viewers made an award of $1100, and appellee appealed to the court of common pleas and a verdict in his favor of $2500 was rendered. Upon refusal of its motion for a new trial and the entry of judgment on the verdict, the Commonwealth appealed to this Court, alleging error in the charge to the jury. We, being convinced that there was error but that it was harmless, affirmed the judgment (346 Pa. 262, 29 A. 2d, 531). Thereafter the Commonwealth offered to pay the amount of the judgment (and eventually did so), but refused to pay interest on the verdict and the costs incident thereto; and, therefore, appellee petitioned the court below for a rule for such payment. This rule was granted, as well as one requested by the Commonwealth on the question of jurisdiction. The court below then entered an order dismissing the Commonwealth's petition and the rule granted thereon; making absolute the rule granted on appellee's petition and directing the Commonwealth to pay the costs and interest involved. From that order, the Commonwealth took this appeal.
The Commonwealth does not now dispute its liability for payment of the costs, nor could it effectively do so, in view of our recent decision in Tunison v. Commonwealth, 347 Pa. 76, 31 A.2d 521. The very narrow question before us is, as set forth in the Commonwealth's brief: "Is the Commonwealth liable to a property owner for the payment of interest in addition to the amount recovered as actual property damages when it has exercised the right of eminent domain for the improvement of a State highway?"
As to payment of interest by the State, we said, in Philadelphia v Commonwealth, 276 Pa. 12, 14, 119 A. 723: See also Northwest'n Nat. Bk. v. Com'nw'lth, 345 Pa. 192, 27 A.2d 20. In the instant case, there is no contract by any executive officer to pay interest on the verdict, nor is there any sta...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
De Bruhl v. State Highway and Public Works Commission, 98
...question in the affirmative. Nor could the rule be otherwise without palpably violating the State Constitution. * * * Culver v. Commonwealth, 348 Pa. 472, 35 A.2d 64, upon which the appellant heavily relies, is not in point as even a cursory reading of the opinion should at once disclose. T......
-
Hoffman v. Pittsburgh
... ... 50 A. 825. The right of the intervening plaintiffs as owners ... of lots fronting on Diamond Square is particularly clear. In ... Commonwealth v. Connellsville Borough, 201 Pa. 154, ... 158, 50 A. 825, Mr. Justice MITCHELL said: " ... the ... private complainants as purchasers of lots ... v. Kirschnek ... et al., 317 Pa. 225; Commonwealth v. Trunk et ... al., 320 Pa. 270; see 59 C.J. 1103, Sec. [365 Pa. 399] ... 653." Culver v. Commonwealth , 348 Pa. 472, ... 475, 35 A.2d 64 ... In ... Culver v. Commonwealth , 348 Pa. 472, 475, 35 A.2d ... 64, the question ... ...
-
Pennsylvania Ass'n of State Mental Hosp. Physicians v. State Employees' Retirement Bd.
... ... STATE EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT BOARD, et al., Respondents. Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.August 10, 1984 ... Heard ... May 11, 1984 ... [483 A.2d 1004] ... Richard ... B. Sigmond, Esq ... do so is clearly manifest, either by express terms or ... necessary implication". Culver v. Commonwealth, ... 348 Pa. 472, 475, 35 A.2d 64, 65 (1944). The Board then ... argues that, inasmuch as neither Section 1726 nor Section ... ...
-
Pennsylvania Ass'n of State Mental Hosp. Physicians v. State Employees' Retirement Bd.
...property unless the intention to do so is clearly manifest, either by express terms or necessary implication". Culver v. Commonwealth, 348 Pa. 472, 475, 35 A.2d 64, 65 (1944). The Board then argues that, inasmuch as neither Section 1726 nor Section 2503 of the Judicial Code specifically aut......