Legal Opinion

Howley v. Central Valley Railroad

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 9, 1905No. Appeal, No. 91PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal, No. 91, Jan. T., 1905, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. Luzerne Co., March T., 1903, No. 1, dismissing bill in equity in case of Martin Howley v.' The Central Valley Railroad Company. Bill in equity for an injunction to restrain the construction of a railroad company to be operated by electricity.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 91, Jan. T., 1905, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. Luzerne Co., March T., 1903, No. 1, dismissing bill in equity in case of Martin Howley v.' The Central Valley Railroad Company. Bill in equity for an injunction to restrain the construction of a railroad company to be operated by electricity. Before Halsey, J. From the record it appeared that the defendant company was incorporated under the Act of April 4, 1868, P. L. 62. The prayer of the bill was as follows: “That the court issue a perpetual injunction directed to the defendant, restraining said defendant and all persons…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Brown,

The appellee is a railroad company incorporated under the Act of April 4, 1868, P. L. 62. In addition to locomotive engines it uses electricity as a motive power, which is carried to motors on the cars through a third rail. After locating the route of its road over the land of plaintiff it was unable to agree with him as to the amount of damages which he sustained, and, to secure the payment of the same, a bond was filed and approved by the court of common pleas. After its approval he undertook, by force, to prevent the construction of the railroad upon his…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Borough of Millvale v. Evergreen Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
  2. Reeves v. Phila. Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
  3. Potts v. Quaker City Elevated R. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
  4. Potter v. Scranton Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Gring v. Sinking Spring Water Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Warren v. FitzgeraldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1948
  3. Russell v. Kentucky Utilities CompanyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
  4. McCully v. Pittsburg Railways Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
  5. City of Aledo v. Tri County Light & Power Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1914

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

Powered by the Exa API