Chambersburg Woolen Co. v. Hager
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 321, Oct. T., 1916, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. Franklin Co., Vol. Ill, Equity Docket page 201, dismissing bill in equity in case of Chambersburg Woolen Company and John C. Melville and William H. Duval, partners trading as Melville Woolen Company v. John K. Hager. Bill in equity for an injunction. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was decree dismissing the bill.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Trexler, J.,
The plaintiffs’ bill of complaint recites that they are the owners of a large tract of land whereon is erected a woolen mill run partly by water power; that they are the owners of the bed of a stream known as Palling Spring, and that they have the right to the unobstructed flow of the water in said stream and the right to enter upon the bed thereof or the adjacent lands for the purpose of cleaning it. The wrong complained of is that the defendant is erecting a building across the bed of said stream extending from the one bank to a line within a few feet of the other bank…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Mercantile Library Co. v. Fidelity Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Carter v. LebzelterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Nanheim v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Pennsylvania Coal & Coke Co. v. JonesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
3Cited by3 opinions
- S. Austin Bicking Paper Manufacturing Co. v. WorrallSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Engel v. Cuddeback, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Pike County1947
- Mulville Et Ux. v. Cooper Et Ux.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1927