Reuting v. City of Titusville
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 56, Jan. T., 1896, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. Crawford Co., Sept. T., 1895, No. 8, dissolving preliminary injunction. Bill in equity by citizens, property owners and taxpayers' of a city of tbe third class, to restrain the carrying out of a municipal contract for paving streets. The material facts will appear by tbe opinion of tbe court. The court granted a preliminary injunction.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 56, Jan. T., 1896, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. Crawford Co., Sept. T., 1895, No. 8, dissolving preliminary injunction. Bill in equity by citizens, property owners and taxpayers' of a city of tbe third class, to restrain the carrying out of a municipal contract for paving streets. The material facts will appear by tbe opinion of tbe court. The court granted a preliminary injunction. Subsequently, on a motion to dissolve the injunction, the plaintiffs presented among others the following requests: 11. Another [bid] was received from William H. McDonald, proposing to do the…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee. Cubiam,
The reasons for sustaining the action of the defendants in awarding the paving contract in this case to Rouse are set forth so clearly and forcibly in the opinion of the learned court below that we affirm the decree on that opinion.
Decree affirmed.
2Cited by20 opinions
- Hibbs v. ArensbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Wilson v. New Castle CitySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Brown v. Gay-Padgett Hdw. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1914
- In re State to Issue Bonds to Fund IndebtednessSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Athens National Bank v. Ridgebury TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.