Legal Opinion

Magee v. Overshiner

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided March 29, 1898No. 18,158PublishedCited by 38 opinions

From the Howard Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtHackney, J.

Rufus Magee, the owner of a business property fronting upon one of the principal business streets of the city of, Logansport and the owner of the fee in the street, brought this suit for a mandatory injunction to cause the removal of a telephone pole placed by the appellee, Overshiner, in the curb-line of the sidewalk in front of said property. 'The appellee, the owner of the telephone system in said city, placed said pole and strung wires upon the same in the night time, after protest by the appellant, and without compensation to or consent from him.

The principal question in the case is as…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Cater v. Northwestern Telephone Exchange Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
  2. Pierce v. DrewMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
  3. Eels v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1894
  4. Julia Building Ass'n v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1885
  5. Detroit City Railway v. MillsMichigan Supreme Court · 1891

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Macy Elevator, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
  2. Village of Grosse Pointe Shores v. AyresMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
  3. State ex rel. Goodwine v. CadwalladerIndiana Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Howard v. United StatesIndiana Supreme Court · 2012
  5. Mordhurst v. Ft. Wayne & Southwestern Traction Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1904

33 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