Casey v. Canning
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 124, Oct. T., 1909, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1905, No. 1,862, on verdict for defendant in case of Louise E. H. Casey, Trustee, v. John Canning. Trespass for interference with an easement. Before Barratt, J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Superior Court and by Casey v. Canning, 39 Pa. Superior Ct. 94. Error assigned was in entering judgment for defendant on the verdict.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
In 1891. there was conveyed to one William Easby_ a parcel of land in the city of Philadelphia, on the southwest corner of Spruce and Factory or Cypress streets. The property was irregular in shape, fronting about eighteen feet on Spruce street and extending of that width clear through the block to the other street mentioned. Along that street, however, it fronted about sixty feet, making the whole piece L shaped. That portion of the property which fronted only on Factory street had a depth of about thirty-five feet. Although all of the property mentioned was conveyed by a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Wells v. . GarbuttNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Grace Methodist Episcopal Church v. DobbinsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Powers v. HeffernanIllinois Supreme Court · 1908
- Overdeer's Administrator v. UpdegraffSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1872
- Held v. McBrideSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Clements v. Sannuti Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- Stein v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Drum v. DinkelackerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Geissel Et Ux. v. SuppleeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Brabson v. School Directors of Fulton Township, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County1954
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.