Legal Opinion

Salmon v. Rochester & Lake Ontario Water Co.

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1923PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Suit for an injunction.

1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.

At the trial defendant moved for judgment on plaintiffs’ opening and the complaint. By agreement the trial was then suspended so that the questions involved might be examined and submitted.

Plaintiffs sue in equity for an injunction to restrain defendant from discontinuing supplying water under a contract which defend*132ant here attacks as invalid, on the ground, first, lack of power on the part of plaintiffs to make it; and second, if it be claimed that it was made by authority of an implied power, then that it was void because made for more than five years. Defendant also challenges plaintiffs’…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Ellis v. Tampa Water Works Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1908
  2. Hackett v. OttawaSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  3. Holroyd v. . Town of Indian LakeNew York Court of Appeals · 1905
  4. Looney v. . HughesNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
  5. Higgins v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Dour v. Village of Port JeffersonNew York Supreme Court · 1976
  2. People ex rel. Barnes v. Warden of WorkhouseNew York Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Village of Attica v. DayNew York Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Cupid Diaper Service Corp. v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API