Legal Opinion

Pratt, Read & Co. v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided October 9, 1925PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The motion for reargument is based upon the proposition- that General Statutes, § 3660, contemplates that the Public Utilities Commission may make not merely an affirmative order requiring gates, flagmen, etc., but a negative order prohibiting either.

We did not and cannot now construe this statute as giving the Commission power to make a negative order of this character. We did not overlook the distinction the defendant attempts to draw between General Statutes, §§ 3660 and 3661, and §§ 3792-3796. We do not think it exists, but that the principle announced in the decision is equally…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Dyson v. New York & New England RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1888

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Kinderavich v. PalmerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
  2. Schumacher v. MillerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API