Opinion

Cherry v. City of Philadelphia

  • 547 Pa. 679
  • 692 A.2d 1082
  • 1997 Pa. LEXIS 814
Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Apr 23, 1997
Status
Published
Author
Zappala
On the bench
Flaherty, Zappala, Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman
Cited by
16 cases
Authority
More cited than 8.9%

stating that the Tax Review Board has exclusive jurisdiction over disputes concerning local tax liability in the City of Philadelphia

How later courts described this case

  • stating that the Tax Review Board has exclusive jurisdiction over disputes concerning local tax liability in the City of Philadelphia
  • the Board has exclusive jurisdiction over disputes concerning local tax liability in the City
  • Opinion Announcing the Judgment of the Court

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

ZAPPALA, Justice,

concurring.

Although I concur in the result, I must disassociate myself from the reasoning and analysis employed by the Majority to *687 reach this result. I believe a more accurate statement of the law is that which is reflected in the majority opinion of the Commonwealth Court, authored by the Honorable Dan Pellegrini.

Commonwealth Court concluded that, “[bjecause [the] complaint did not set forth a substantial constitutional question, the trial court did not err in refusing to exercise its equity jurisdiction to decide this case under the Declaratory Judgments Act.” Cherry v. City of Philadelphia, 160 Pa.Cmwlth. 179, 184 , 634 A.2d 754, 756 (1993). I would affirm on such basis.

FLAHERTY, C.J., and CAPPY, J., join this concurring opinion.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.