Legal Opinion

City of Middlesboro v. Kentucky Utilities Co.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)

Decided April 25, 1934PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Dietzman

Dissolving injunction in part and modifying in part.

This action is before me on motion to dissolve a temporary injunction granted by the lower court. The facts of this case are these:

The defendant, hereinafter called the company, has furnished electric service for more than 20 years, and water service for more than 15 years, to the plaintiff, hereinafter called the city, and its inhabitants. For more than 10 years prior to January, 1931, it has been the custom of the city to pay for the services furnished it in lighting its streets and municipal buildings and in…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Nash v. PageCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1882
  2. Louisville Tobacco Warehouse Co. v. Louisville Water Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915
  3. Cox v. City of CynthianaCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1906
  4. City of Middlesboro v. Kentucky Utilities Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1931
  5. Bell's Trustee v. City of LexingtonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1905

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. City of Middlesboro v. Kentucky Utilities Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1940
  2. Huff v. Electric Plant Board of MonticelloCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1957
  3. Huff v. Electric Plant Board of MonticelloCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1957

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

Powered by the Exa API