Lockwood v. Ambridge Borough
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 191, Oct. T., 1911, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. Beaver Co., Sept. T., 1911, No. 4, in case of C. A. Lockwood, G. S. Niver and C. L. McHenry v. Ambridge Borough et al. Bill in equity to restrain a borough from issuing bonds to construct a waterworks.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 191, Oct. T., 1911, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. Beaver Co., Sept. T., 1911, No. 4, in case of C. A. Lockwood, G. S. Niver and C. L. McHenry v. Ambridge Borough et al. Bill in equity to restrain a borough from issuing bonds to construct a waterworks. Before Holt, P. J. At the hearing it appeared that the borough had a right to build a water plant, but the plaintiffs objected that a part of the territory within which the pipes were to be laid, was covered by a plan of lots by which the owners had reserved to themselves the right to lay water pipes in the streets in the plan…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
This is an appeal from a decree dissolving a preliminary injunction restraining a borough from issuing bonds for the construction of waterworks. The established practice in such appeals is to determine only whether on the facts developed an injunction should have been granted or refused and to withhold any expression of opinion on the merits until after final hearing and decree.
The decree is affirmed at the cost of the appellant.
2Cited by3 opinions
- Borough of Sunbury v. Sunbury & Susquehanna Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
- Casinghead Gas Co. v. OsbornSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- National Automobile Service Inc. v. BarfodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927