Montville Street Railway Co. v. New London Northern Railroad
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Application for a finding that public convenience and. necessity required the construction of the plaintiffs street railway, brought to the Hon. John M. Thayer, a judge of the Superior Court; facts found and application dismissed, and appeal by the plaintiff for alleged errors in the rulings of the judge. In this court the defendants filed a plea in abatement, which was argued with the appeal. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtTorrance, J.
The plaintiff made application to a judge *419of the Superior Court, under § 8 of Chap. 169 of the Public Acts of 1898, for a hearing and decision upon the question as to whether public convenience and necessity required the construction of its street railway parallel to certain steam railways. Upon a hearing had the judge dismissed said application, and from his decision the applicant brought the present appeal.
In this court a plea in abatement was filed at the proper time by the appellees which alleged, among other things, that “ the said appeal is not allowed by the judge of the Superior Court…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Westfield Cemetery Association v. DanielsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1892
3Cited by8 opinions
- Walkinshaw v. O'BrienSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1943
- San Antonio & A. P. Ry. Co. v. BlairTexas Supreme Court · 1917
- San Antonio & A. P. Ry. Co. v. BlairTexas Supreme Court · 1917
- New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad v. IllySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1907
- San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway Co. v. BlairTexas Supreme Court · 1917
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.