MCGARRITY, ADMINISTRATOR,
v.
DELAWARE RIVER BRIDGE COMMISSION ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
McGarrity sought damages for loss of access to his leasehold caused by a street grade change authorized by a state commission under a 1919 Pennsylvania statute. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court held the damages were merely consequential and not recoverable, and ruled the statute unconstitutional under the state constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the appeal because McGarrity failed to properly present a substantial federal question, as he did not raise Fourteenth Amendment issues until seeking rehearing in the state court and the record lacked essential pleadings and factual findings needed to review constitutional claims.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Per Curiam.
This action was brought to recover damages alleged to have been caused by a change in the grade of a street which prevented access to appellant’s leasehold. The authority of the State Commission which directed the change of grade was conferred by the state statute of July 9, 1919, P.L. 814. The state court held that the damage in question was merely consequential, that the allowance of recovery therefor was a matter of legislative grace and not of right, and that the statute as invoked by appellant was invalid as it did not conform to the requirements of the state constitution. 311 Pa. 436; 166 Atl. 895. No federal question was raised prior to a petition for rehearing in the Supreme Court of the State, which was denied without more. Appellant insists that questions under the Fourteenth Amendment were thus raised at the first opportunity. The petition for rehearing does not appear in the record. Nor does the record contain the pleadings, the evidence, or any findings by the state court upon the questions of fact involved. Appellant relies upon statements in the opinion of the state court but these fail to support appellant’s contentions.
The appeal is dismissed for the want of a properly presented substantial federal question. Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357, 360, 362, 363; Dewey v. Des Moines, 173 U.S. 193, 199, 200; Transportation Co. v. Chicago, 99 U.S. 635, 641-643; Wabash R. Co. v. Defiance, 167 U.S. 88, 101.
Dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (U.S. 1927)
- Dewey v. Des Moines, 173 U.S. 193 (U.S. 1899)
- Transp. Co. v. Chicago, 99 U.S. 635 (U.S. 1878)
- Wabash R.R. Co. v. Defiance, 167 U.S. 88 (U.S. 1897)