Legal Opinion

Bell Telephone Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 27, 1944No. Appeal, 128PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Kenworthey, J.,

In 1914 appellant and The Central District Telephone Company, appellee’s predecessor, entered into an agreement under the terms of which appellant gave the telephone company a license or permit to maintain manholes and underground conduits on its station site in the town of Eankin, Allegheny County. The license was revocable by appellant on ninety days’ written notice. In 1939, while the license was still in force, appellant leased the station site or a part of it to the Gravity Fill Service Station, Inc., the additional defendant, with leave to install underground…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Funk v. HaldemanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1867
  2. Nock v. Coca Cola Bot. Wks. Pgh.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  3. Cockcroft v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  4. Siegel v. Struble Bros., Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  5. Union Petroleum Co. v. Bliven Petroleum Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1872

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. General Mills, Inc. v. SnavelySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  2. Bruker v. Carlisle BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  3. Lucky Auto Supply v. TurnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
  4. Illinois Bell Telephone Co. v. Charles Ind Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1954
  5. LITTLER v. DUNBARSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API