Lukens v. Lasher
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 369, Jan. T., 1901, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., June T., 1901, No. 1504, dismissing bill in equity in case of W. H. R. Lukens and Samuel H. K. Kirkpatrick v. George F. Lasher. Bill in equity for an injunction to restrain the use of a wall. From the record it appeared that the plaintiffs were trustees of the Odd Fellows Temple at Broad and Cherry streets, Philadelphia, and that defendant was the owner of adjoining premises to the east.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 369, Jan. T., 1901, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., June T., 1901, No. 1504, dismissing bill in equity in case of W. H. R. Lukens and Samuel H. K. Kirkpatrick v. George F. Lasher. Bill in equity for an injunction to restrain the use of a wall. From the record it appeared that the plaintiffs were trustees of the Odd Fellows Temple at Broad and Cherry streets, Philadelphia, and that defendant was the owner of adjoining premises to the east. Prior to the filing of the bill there had been negotiations between the parties for tbe price to be paid for the use of…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Fell,
The case presented by the plaintiff did not call for equitable interference by injunction. If the wall was not strictly a party wall, by common consent of the parties it had been so treated. The negotiations for the price to be paid for its use were with the mutual understanding that it was a party wall, and they terminated in an agreement on a sum, subject to be enlarged or diminished by a measurement, which was paid by the defendant. As there was not a final adjustment of the matter of compensation, it would have been better that the decree should have reserved…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Thompson v. DeLongSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- McClernan v. GreenbergSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- 631 N. Broad St. v. Congregation Rodeph ShalomSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019