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.
7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 28 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from ALLEGHENY CTY. SPORTSMEN'S LEAGUE v. Rendell.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ALLEGHENY CTY. SPORTSMEN'S LEAGUE v. Rendell Anchor | green | “the general assembly does not intend a result that is absurd, impossible of execution or unreasonable,” | 4 |
| 2 | A. Ziegler v. City of Reading and Reading Area Water Authority | green | “although home rule cities may not be limited or restrained by their former municipal codes, there is no law preventing a home rule charter from exercising powers bestowed by its former code.” | 4 |
| 3 | Adams v. New Kensington | green | “as ample authority for the reasonable exercise, bona fide, of broad and varied municipal activity to protect the health, morals, peace and good order of the community.” | 4 |
| 4 | City of Pittsburgh v. Fraternal Order of Police, Fort Pitt Lodge No. 1 | green | “functions not denied by the constitution of pennsylvania, by statute or by the municipality's home rule charter.” | 4 |
| 5 | Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority v. City of Philadelphia | green | “a home-rule municipality's exercise of legislative power is presumed valid, absent a specific constitutional or statutory limitation.” | 4 |
| 6 | Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority v. City of Philadelphia | green | “contrary to or in limitation or enlargement of powers granted by statutes which are applicable to a class or classes of municipalities.” | 4 |
| 7 | Pennsylvania Restaurant & Lodging Ass'n v. City of Pittsburgh | neutral | “intergovernmental cooperation agreement” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.