BLAUNER’S, INC., ET AL. v. PHILA. ET AL., 330 Pa. 340 (1938)

198 A. 889

Blauner’s, Inc., et al., Appellants, v. Philadelphia et al. Wilson et ux., Appellants, v. Philadelphia et al.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.March 21, 1938.
March 23, 1938.

Before KEPHART, C. J., SCHAFFER, MAXEY, DREW, LINN, STERN and BARNES, JJ.

Appeals, Nos. 195, 200 and 201, Jan. T., 1938, from decrees of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., Nos. 4658 and 4546,

Page 341

Dec. T., 1937, respectively, in cases of Blauner’s, Inc., et al. v. City of Philadelphia et al., and S. Davis Wilson et ux. v. City of Philadelphia et al. Decree affirmed in each case.

Bills in equity. Before McDEVITT, P. J., KUN and PARRY, JJ.

The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.

Preliminary objections sustained and decrees entered dismissing bills, opinions per curiam. Plaintiffs in each case appealed.

Errors assigned, among others, were decrees.

Paul Freeman, of Freeman, Fox Steeble, with him Simon Pearl, for appellants, in No. 195.

Lemuel B. Schofield, with him W. Bradley Ward, for appellants, in Nos. 200 and 201.

Robert T. McCracken, with him George G. Chandler, for Receiver of Taxes, appellee.

Abraham Wernick, with him G. Coe Farrier, Assistant City Solicitors, and Joseph Sharfsin, City Solicitor, for City of Philadelphia, appellee.

M. J. S. Stoney, for amicus curiæ.

Carlos Berguido, Jr., with him Ira Jewell Williams, Townsend Munson, Robert V. Massey, Jr., J. Harry LaBrum, Bertram K. Wolfe, H. Eugene Heine, George V. Strong, John J. McDevitt, Jr., Boyd Lee Spahr, Barnes, Biddle Myers and Brown Williams, for amici curiae.

PER CURIAM, March 23, 1938:

We find no foundation for the objections to the enforcement of the City Sales Tax Ordinance made, on the

Page 342

one hand, by the plaintiff appellants, and, on the other, by briefs filed under Rule 61 on behalf of the Philadelphia Restaurant Managers’ Association, and the Club Managers’ Association.

In each appeal the decree is affirmed at appellants’ costs. An opinion will be filed in due course by Mr. Justice DREW stating the reasons for this conclusion.