Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

JUDITH M. DONNELLY v. BOROUGH MEDIA (01/27/76)

decided: January 27, 1976.

JUDITH M. DONNELLY, MARYANNE LONGBOTTOM, ET AL., APPELLANTS
v.
BOROUGH OF MEDIA, ET AL., APPELLEES



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County in case of Judith M. Donnelly, Maryanne Longbottom, et al. v. Borough of Media and John Hoffman, Tax Collector, No. 75-1280.

COUNSEL

Howard Farber, for appellants.

D. Barry Gibbons, with him Gibbons, Buckley & Smith, for appellees.

President Judge Bowman and Judges Crumlish, Jr., Mencer, Rogers and Blatt. Judges Kramer and Wilkinson, Jr., did not participate. Opinion by Judge Crumlish, Jr.

Author: Crumlish

[ 23 Pa. Commw. Page 116]

Citizen-taxpayers of Media Borough filed a petition in the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County appealing the adoption of an Earned Income Tax Ordinance. Their petition was dismissed.*fn1 Taxpayers (Appellants) and Media Borough (Borough) are now before us.

[ 23 Pa. Commw. Page 117]

On January 2, 1975, the Borough Council enacted Ordinance No. 637 imposing a tax for general revenue purposes on earned income and net profits earned and received by residents of and persons employed in the Borough. The effective date of the ordinance was February 2, 1975. The ordinance was vetoed by the Borough's Mayor. The Borough Council passed the Ordinance over the Mayor's veto on January 16, 1975.

Appellants' objections to the Ordinance are summarized as follows:

     a) The effective date specified in the ordinance (February 2, 1975) violates statutory provisions requiring a thirty-day period between adoption and effective date;

     b) The tax imposed by the ordinance is unreasonable and will lead to an excessive cash surplus;

     c) The tax imposed by the ordinance is discriminatory in that it lacks uniformity;

     d) The tax imposed exceeds the limits imposed upon such taxes by ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.