Slingluff v. Tyson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 317, Jan. T., 1924, by defendant, from decree of C. P. Montgomery Co., April T., 1923, No. 7, on bill in equity, in case of William H. Slingluff et al. v. Daniel L. Tyson. Bill for injunction. Before Miller, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. Decree for plaintiff. Defendant appealed. Error assigned was, inter alia, decree, quoting it.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Frazer,
Defendant appeals from a decree restraining him from conducting an automobile sales and service station in a residential section in the Borough of Norristown.
Plaintiffs are residents in and owners of dwelling houses situated on West Main Street in that borough. Defendant’s contract with the manufacturers of Paige and Jewett automobiles requires him to give three months’ free service to purchasers of new cars of such manufacture and, after the expiration of that time, to give service upon application to owners of all cars of both makes, regardless of where or from…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Phillips v. DonaldsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Prendergast v. WallsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
3Cited by15 opinions
- Burke v. HollingerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Carney v. Penn Oil Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Mitchell v. Guaranty Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Ladner v. SiegelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Ladner v. SiegelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.