Delaware & Raritan Canal & Camden & Amboy Railroad & Transportation Companies v. Camden & Atlantic Railroad
New Jersey Court of Chancery
This cause was originally argued upon a motion for a preliminary injunction upon bill, answers, and affidavits. On the 12th of August, 1862, the preliminary injunction was refused upon grounds then succinctly stated by the Chancellor.* bio further proceedings were had in the cause until the 9th of June, 1863, when leave was given to the complainants to file their replication to the answers of the defendants to the original bill, and also to file a supplemental bill.
Read the full summary
This cause was originally argued upon a motion for a preliminary injunction upon bill, answers, and affidavits. On the 12th of August, 1862, the preliminary injunction was refused upon grounds then succinctly stated by the Chancellor.* bio further proceedings were had in the cause until the 9th of June, 1863, when leave was given to the complainants to file their replication to the answers of the defendants to the original bill, and also to file a supplemental bill. On the 10th of June, 1863, the complainants filed their supplemental bill, by which, after setting out the substance of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The complainants, the united Delaware and Raritan Canal and Camden and Amboy Railroad and Transportation Companies, ask to be protected in the en*357joymentof certain franchises and exclusive privileges granted to them by the state of New Jersey. By their original bill, they asked that an injunction should issue to prevent the formation, by the defendants, of a continuous line of conveyance by railroad from the Delaware river to Earitan bay, by a junction of their respective roads, which might be used for the transportation of passengers or merchandise between the cities of New…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Proprietors of the Charles River Bridge v. Proprietors of the Warren BridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1837
- Providence Bank v. BillingsSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
- The West River Bridge Company v. DIXSupreme Court of the United States · 1848
- Mohawk Bridge Co. v. Utica & Schenectady Rail RoadNew York Court of Chancery · 1837
- Beaty v. Lessee of KnowlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Unger v. Landlords' Management Corp.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1933
- Bingham v. Savings Invest., C., E. OrangeNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1927
- Mosig v. Jersey Chiropodists, Inc.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1937
- Ace Bus Trans. Co. v. South Hudson, C., Assn.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1935