Legal Opinion

Oahu Railway & Land Co. v. Armstrong

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided October 17, 1907PublishedCited by 1 opinion

ÁPPEALS from Circuit Judge, Eibst Circuit.

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT BY

HARTWELL, C.J.

Upon the plaintiff’s appeal from a decree dismissing his bill to enjoin the defendant from maintaining a certain iron pipe used for the conveyance of water across Lehna avenue, Pearl City,- Oahn, and under the railroad track of the plaintiff we held “that the defendant should be enjoined from maintaining the pipe line in question,” reversed'the decree and remanded, the cause “for such further proceedings as may be proper not inconsistent with this opinion.” Ante, p. 258. The decision was rendered February 11 last. The plaintiff thereupon moved the circuit…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Krippendorf v. HydeSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Propeller Monticello v. MollisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1855
  3. Central Trust Co. v. Texas & St. L. Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1885
  4. Central Trust Co. and another v. Texas & St. L. Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1885
  5. Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Co. v. Waikapu Sugar Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Chierighino v. BowersHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API