Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Pennsylvania opinions name it 5 courts 1938–1952 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Turco Paint & Varnish Co. v. Kalodnergreen2 sentences1946In Turco Paint and Varnish Company v. Kalodner et al., 320 Pa. 421 at 436 , we find the title to the act is sufficient if it gives such notice of its contents as to put the reader to further inquiry. 1938It is enough if it give such notice of the contents of the act as to put the reader to further inquiry: Turco Paint & Varnish Co. v. Kalodner, 320 Pa. 421, 436 . | 1 | 4 |
Sugar Notch Boroughgreen2 sentences1938It is enough if it gives such notice of . the contents of the act as to put the reader to further inquiry: Turco Paint & Varnish Co. v. Kalodner, 320 Pa. 421, 436 [ 184 A. 37 ]....... “......the constitutional provision as to titles was intended to curb ‘the vicious practice......of incorporating in one bill a variety of distinct and independent subjects of legislation [the real purpose of which] was often and sometimes intentionally disguised by a misleading title or covered by the all-comprehensive phrase, “and for other purposes” with which the title of many “omnibus” bills concluded’: Road 1938It is enough if it gives such notice of . the contents of the act as to put the reader to further inquiry: Turco Paint & Varnish Co. v. Kalodner, 320 Pa. 421, 436 [ 184 A. 37 ]....... “......the constitutional provision as to titles was intended to curb ‘the vicious practice......of incorporating in one bill a variety of distinct and independent subjects of legislation [the real purpose of which] was often and sometimes intentionally disguised by a misleading title or covered by the all-comprehensive phrase, “and for other purposes” with which the title of many “omnibus” bills concluded’: Road | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Schireson v. Shafer
green
1 sentence1952Article III, sec. 3, of the Constitution of Pennsylvania provides as follows: “No bill, except general appropriation bills, shall be passed containing more than one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title.” A succinct interpretation of this provision is set forth in Schireson v. Shafer et al., 354 Pa. 458, 461 , as follows: “It is clear that a title which mentions that the act is amendatory, recites the particular prior acts it is designed to amend and further specifies the sections of the prior acts involved, puts a person of a reasonably inquiring state of mind on notice of th | 1 | 1952–1952 |
Poor District Case (No. 1)
green
1 sentence1939And in Poor District Case (No. 1), 329 Pa. 390 , when passing on the question of whether the title of an act violated article III, section 3, of the Constitution, the Supreme Court stated (p. 401) : “It is enough if it give such notice of the contents of the act as to put the reader to further inquiry”. | 1 | 1939–1939 |
In re Road in the Borough of Phoenixville
green
1 sentence1938It is enough if it gives such notice of . the contents of the act as to put the reader to further inquiry: Turco Paint & Varnish Co. v. Kalodner, 320 Pa. 421, 436 [ 184 A. 37 ]....... “......the constitutional provision as to titles was intended to curb ‘the vicious practice......of incorporating in one bill a variety of distinct and independent subjects of legislation [the real purpose of which] was often and sometimes intentionally disguised by a misleading title or covered by the all-comprehensive phrase, “and for other purposes” with which the title of many “omnibus” bills concluded’: Road | 1 | 1938–1938 |
Commonwealth v. Stofchek
green
2 sentences1938It is enough if it gives such notice of . the contents of the act as to put the reader to further inquiry: Turco Paint & Varnish Co. v. Kalodner, 320 Pa. 421, 436 [ 184 A. 37 ]....... “......the constitutional provision as to titles was intended to curb ‘the vicious practice......of incorporating in one bill a variety of distinct and independent subjects of legislation [the real purpose of which] was often and sometimes intentionally disguised by a misleading title or covered by the all-comprehensive phrase, “and for other purposes” with which the title of many “omnibus” bills concluded’: Road 1938It is enough if it gives such notice of . the contents of the act as to put the reader to further inquiry: Turco Paint & Varnish Co. v. Kalodner, 320 Pa. 421, 436 [ 184 A. 37 ]....... “......the constitutional provision as to titles was intended to curb ‘the vicious practice......of incorporating in one bill a variety of distinct and independent subjects of legislation [the real purpose of which] was often and sometimes intentionally disguised by a misleading title or covered by the all-comprehensive phrase, “and for other purposes” with which the title of many “omnibus” bills concluded’: Road | 1 | 1938–1938 |
Soldiers and Sailors Memorial Bridge
green
2 sentences1938As stated in Soldiers and Sailors Memorial Bridge, 308 Pa. 487 [ 162 A. 309 ], citing Carr v. Aetna A. & L. 1938As stated in Soldiers and Sailors Memorial Bridge, 308 Pa. 487 [ 162 A. 309 ], citing Carr v. Aetna A. & L. | 1 | 1938–1938 |