New York & New Jersey Telephone Co. v. Inhabitants of East Orange
New Jersey Court of Chancery
A statute provided that telephone poles should not be erected in any incorporated city or town until the streets wherein they were to be erected had been designated by the municipal authorities. A telephone company (the defendants) erected their poles in the township of East Orange.
Read the full summary
A statute provided that telephone poles should not be erected in any incorporated city or town until the streets wherein they were to be erected had been designated by the municipal authorities. A telephone company (the defendants) erected their poles in the township of East Orange. They never applied for such designation, nor had it been made. — Held, that since several powers usually granted to towns, and beyond those granted generally to rural townships, had been conferred on complainants by legislation, among which was the power to enact ordinances to prevent or regulate the erection or…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The controversy between the parties in this case is in reference to the right of the township authorities to remove poles for tele*491phone wires set by the complainants on Park avenue, in the township. The complainants allege that they have succeeded by assignment from the Bell Telephone Company, to a right granted by the Essex public road board to that company, by agreement in writing, to set the poles, and that they themselves have directly received such permission (but verbally only) from that board. The complainants claim that being duly incorporated under the laws of this…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Lorillard v. . the Town of MonroeNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
- Town of Centerville v. WoodsIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
- Eaton v. Supervisors of Manitowoc CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
- Town of Brazil v. KressIndiana Supreme Court · 1876
- Township of West Bend v. MunchSupreme Court of Iowa · 1879
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.