Legal Opinion

Heil v. South Easton Water Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 1, 1912No. Appeal, No. 210Published

Appeal, No. 210, Oct. T., 1911, by defendant, from decree of C. P. Northampton Co., Sept. T., 1910, No. 3, on bill in equity in case of U. S. G. Heil v. South Easton Water Company. Bill in equity for an injunction. Errors assigned were to various findings of fact and law, and to final decree granting an injunction to which no exception was taken.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Morrison, J.,

After disposing of thirty-seven requests for findings of fact, and nine for findings of law, and twenty-eight exceptions, the learned court below filed the following decree:

“And now, March 20, 1911, this cause came on to be heard by the court en Banc upon exceptions to the findings of fact and conclusions of law, and upon consideration thereof, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the exceptions are dismissed and that the injunction heretofore granted be made permanent and a perpetual injunction *385issue restraining the South Easton Water Company, its officers, agents…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Estate of FullertonPennsylvania Orphans' Court, Armstrong County · 1892
  2. Clay v. Western Maryland RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  3. Johnston's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
  4. Seltzer v. BoyerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
  5. Standard Soap & Oil Co. v. Printz Degreasing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911

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

Powered by the Exa API