Eminent domain — Widening street — Taking of leasehold premises — Damages.
Where a person leases a building after the passage of a city ordinance providing for the widening of the street on which the structure is located, and thereafter the building is taken and destroyed by the city, the lessee is entitled to recover damages from the city for the extinguishment of the balance of his term.
Argued October 13, 1924.
PER CURIAM, November 24, 1924:
In this case, Mary Herron, a tenant, who had leased parts of a building after the passage of an ordinance providing for the widening of the street on which the structure was located, claimed against defendant city damages suffered by reason of the subsequent destruction of the demised premises in course of the municipal improvement, and the consequent extinguishment of the balance of her term. The trial court entered judgment on a verdict in her favor, and the city has appealed, asking that the judgment be reversed and entered for it.
The court below properly decided that Justice Co. v. Phila., 169 Pa. 503, ruled the present case. See also Iron City Auto Co. v. Pittsburgh, 253 Pa. 478, 488.
The judgment is affirmed.