Legal Opinion

Leininger v. Goodman

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 19, 1923No. Appeal, No. 222PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Walling,

William G. Leininger, the plaintiff, owns a hosiery mill at Mohnton, Berks County, which formerly was, and in part still is, operated by water-power. In 1918, however, he erected a powerhouse by the side of the head race and some two hundred feet west of the mill. As part of the same improvement he replaced the earth bank along the south side of the race, from the powerhouse to the mill, by a concrete wall three and a half feet wide, which also serves as a walk. Plaintiff’s scheme of construction required the conveyance of steam and water in pipes from the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Baldwin v. TaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
  2. Cannon v. BoydSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
  3. Zell v. Universalist SocietySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
  4. Thompson v. McElarneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
  5. Chapman v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Turnway Corporation v. SofferSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. Tide Water Pipe Co. v. BellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  3. Weaver v. WelshSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  4. Harkins v. ZamichieliSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  5. Morning Call, Inc. v. Bell Atlantic-Pennsylvania, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API