Powers v. Bald Eagle Boom Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
FROM THE DEGREE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CLINTON COUNTY. No. 262 January Term 1888, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 2 September Term 1888, C. P. in Equity.
Read the full summary
FROM THE DEGREE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CLINTON COUNTY. No. 262 January Term 1888, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 2 September Term 1888, C. P. in Equity. Bill in equity filed to September Term, 1883, by Joseph B. Powers and Catharine Powers, his wife, in the right of said Catharine, against the Bald Eagle Boom Company, Simon Scott, president, and Jacob Scott, treasurer of the said corporation, to compel the defendants to remove certain booms from the Bald Eagle creek, to restrain them forever from erecting and maintaining like illegal structures, and from preventing the unobstructed flow…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion,
Mr. Justice Williams :
fThe maxim of the common law, that wherever there is a right there is a remedy for its infraction, has never been adopted by courts of equity. A party whose right is clear may sleep upon it until his demand becomes stale. He may look on while valuable structures are erected, when he might successfully object, and remain silent until large sums have been expended or important intervening interests have grown up. In such eases the fact that he might have objected at the outset will not avail him. A suitor must not only appear in a court of equity with clean hands,…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Moyerman v. GlanzbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Madison v. Ducktown Sulphur, Copper & Iron Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1904
- Gey v. BeckSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Maier v. Walborn HighSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Kern v. GreensweigSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.