Consolidated Ice Co. v. Pennsylvania Railroad
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 2, Oct. T., 1909, by-defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Aug. T., 1905, No. 95, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Consolidated Ice Company v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company. Appeal from award of jury of view.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 2, Oct. T., 1909, by-defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Aug. T., 1905, No. 95, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Consolidated Ice Company v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company. Appeal from award of jury of view. Before Evans, J. The defendant presented the following points: 1. As to the value of the ice plant and machinery after removal, the measure of damages, where an opportunity of removal has been given to the owner of which he has not availed himself, is the price which the railroad company obtained for the property after removal. The evidence being…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Mestrezat,
By a lease dated April 1, 1891, Mary E. Schenley let to the executors of James Rees, deceased, an irregular shaped lot of ground fronting on Duquesne Way in the city of Pittsburg for the term of twenty years, for the annual rent of $1,250 for the first ten years, and $2,150 for the second ten years. The taxes and assessments on the premises were payable by the lessees, and they had the privilege of removing improvements erected by them at the termination of the lease. The interest of the lessees in the premises subsequently became vested in the Consolidated Ice…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. EbySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
3Cited by3 opinions
- Iron City Automobile Co. v. City of PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Welsbach Street Lighting Co. of America v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- United States v. Certain Parcels of LandDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1966