Nissley v. Drace
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 162, Jan. T., 1913, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Lancaster Co., Equity Docket No. 5, page 277, revoking the certification of proceedings in equity to the law side of the court in case of Abraham L. Nissley v. Daniel Drace. Bill in equity to restrain defendant from interfering with plaintiff’s alleged right to the use of a watercourse. Before Landis, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 162, Jan. T., 1913, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Lancaster Co., Equity Docket No. 5, page 277, revoking the certification of proceedings in equity to the law side of the court in case of Abraham L. Nissley v. Daniel Drace. Bill in equity to restrain defendant from interfering with plaintiff’s alleged right to the use of a watercourse. Before Landis, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. The court after trial on the merits dismissed the bill, and upon petition of plaintiff, certified the case to the law side of the court. On petition of the defendant filed…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Moschzisker,
The plaintiff claimed certain rights in a stream of water which he alleged had been diverted to his prejudice; he filed a bill in equity and prayed that the defendant be enjoined from diverting the water and be required to restore a dam on the latter’s property to accomplish that purpose. The defendant demurred, upon several grounds, one of which was that the plaintiff would have to establish title to the right asserted by him at law before equity would take jurisdiction. Without entering any formal judgment upon the demurrer, leave was granted to amend the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Wilson v. CatherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- New Cumberland Borough v. Riverton Consolidated Water Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
3Cited by1 opinion
- Smith v. McClureSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917