Legal Opinion
Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Hartley
Tennessee Supreme Court
Decided December 15, 1912PublishedCited by 6 opinions
FROM DAVIDSON. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Davidson County to the Court of Civil Appeals, and by writ of certiorari from the Court of Civil Appeals to the Supreme Court. —Thomas E. Matthews, Circuit Judge.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Neil
This action was brought to recover penalties under section 11, chapter 66, of the Acts of 1885. That section reads as follows:
“Every telephone company doing business within this State, and engaged in a general telephone business, shall supply all applicants for telephone connection and facilities without discrimination or partiality, provided such applicants comply or offer to comply with the *188reasonable regulations of the company; and no such company shall impose any condition or restriction upon any such applicant that are not imposed impartially upon all persons or companies in like…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cole Manufacturing Co. v. FallsTennessee Supreme Court · 1891
- Home Telephone Co. v. People's Telephone & Telegraph Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1911
- Yealock v. YealockCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bank of Commerce & Trust Co. v. SenterTennessee Supreme Court · 1923
- Baskin & Cole v. WhitsonCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1928
- Mason v. JamesCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1935
- Lee v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1942
- State ex rel. Russell v. LaMannaTennessee Supreme Court · 1973
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.