Ulmer v. Lime Rock Railroad
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On report. Bill in equity. Bill in equity asking that respondent railroad corporation be enjoined from constructing a branch track across plaintiff’s premises, and for general relief. The facts appear in the opinion. Pursuing the policy adopted throughout the country to develop resources and encourage enterprise, our legislature in passing the Mill Act then “push the power of eminent domain to the very verge of constitutional inhibition.”
Read the full summary
On report. Bill in equity. Bill in equity asking that respondent railroad corporation be enjoined from constructing a branch track across plaintiff’s premises, and for general relief. The facts appear in the opinion. Pursuing the policy adopted throughout the country to develop resources and encourage enterprise, our legislature in passing the Mill Act then “push the power of eminent domain to the very verge of constitutional inhibition.” Jordan v. Woodward, 40 Maine, 317, 323. Plaintiffs contend that in sustaining railroad legislation too, the court went “to the very verge of constitutional…
1Opinion of the CourtWiswell, C. J.
The defendant, the Lime Rock Railroad Company, is a corporation organized under chapter 418 of the Private and Special Laws of 1889, and the amendments thereto, and was *583given power by its charter, “to construct, maintain and use one or more lines of railroad to be operated by steam or horse power, with single or double tracks, from the lime quarries in the city of Rock-land and town of Thomaston, in such direction as may best convene the transportation of lime stone from said quarries to the various lime kilns in said city and town, together with other freight, with convenient branches to…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- United States v. Gettysburg Electric Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Pulllman's Palace Car Co. v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Button v. HoffmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
- Bankhead v. BrownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1868
- Chicago Dock & Canal Co. v. GarrityIllinois Supreme Court · 1885
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Green v. Victor Talking MacH. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
- Majestic Co. v. Orpheum Circuit, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1927
- Morris v. GossSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1951
- William C. Atwater & Co. v. Fall River Pocahontas Collieries Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1937
- Crommett v. City of PortlandSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1954
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.