Buffalo & St. Mary's Railroad v. Philadelphia & Erie Railroad
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 28, Jan. T., 1896, by defendants, from deeree of C. P. Elk Co., Sept. T., 1895, No. 1, on bill in equity. Bill in equity for an overhead crossing.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 28, Jan. T., 1896, by defendants, from deeree of C. P. Elk Co., Sept. T., 1895, No. 1, on bill in equity. Bill in equity for an overhead crossing. From the record it appeared that on August 29, 1895, the defendants’ solicitors, reserving all manner of benefit or advantage of exception to the sufficiency of plaintiff’s bill in this cause, and of the notice to defendants to appear and answer therein, and to the service, manner and return of service, and of all other matters and things contained and embraced therein, appeared de bene esse, and moved the court to dissolve the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Fell,
The bill filed in this case was to prevent interference by the defendants with the location, construction and operation of the plaintiff’s railroad at a point where it was necessary to cross the land and tracks of the defendants’ railroad. The necessity for the crossing was made manifest. The right to cross is conferred by the constitution, and the reasonable limits within which it *272may be exercised are clearly defined by numerous decisions. Tbe only question before tbe court related to tbe place and manner of crossing. A grade crossing was not desired. The plaintiff…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Cassidy v. KnappSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Brinton v. HogueSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896