Legal Opinion

Darlington v. Pennsylvania R. R.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 7, 1924No. Appeal, No. 18PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Me. Justice Kephart,

Appellee appropriated certain lands of appellants situated between Aspinwall and Sharpsburg, along the Allegheny River. The tract condemned contained approximately twenty-six acres, measured from “pool full”; it included all riparian and other rights of plaintiffs extending into the Allegheny River, and was part of .a larger tract containing 239 acres, 175 acres of which were very hilly. Many years ago the Pennsylvania Canal was.built through the level part; the property of the canal has long since been purchased by the railroad and owned in fee: Foust v.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Potts v. Penn. S. V. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
  2. Cameron v. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
  3. McGrunnegle v. Pittsburg & Lake Erie Railroad Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
  4. Foust v. DreutleinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
  5. Baker v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. United States v. Honolulu Plantation Co. Honolulu Plantation Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1950
  2. Andrews v. City of GreenbeltCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1982
  3. Morris v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  4. Pickens v. Hidalgo County Water Control & Improvement District Number SixteenCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1955
  5. Elgart v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959

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

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

Powered by the Exa API