Legal Opinion

Ohio-Midland Light & Power Co. v. Columbus & Southern Ohio Electric Co.

Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division

Decided May 12, 1954No. 189301PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*57OPINION

By BARTLETT, J.

HELD:

1. THE PROVISION IN THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE PARTIES. THAT THE DEFENDANT COMPANY WILL NOT SELL OR DELIVER ELECTRICAL ENERGY DIRECTLY TO ANY CONSUMER LIVING UPON THAT PORTION OF ANY ROAD OR HIGHWAY UPON WHICH THERE EXIST LINES OF THE MIDLAND COMPANY (PLAINTIFF), HAS NO APPLICATION TO CONSUMERS LIVING ON THE STREETS OF CHILLICOTHE MANOR SUBDIVISION, EVEN THOUGH THE PLAINTIFF COMPANY HAS LINES UPON U. S. ROUTE 23 NEARBY AND SAID U. S. ROUTE 23 AFFORDS THE ONLY OUTLET FROM SAID CHILLICOTHE MANOR.

2. THE PRAYER FOR A PERMANENT INJUNCTION IS DENIED.

The plaintiff and the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. London Assurance Corpn. v. . ThompsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
  2. Turner v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1918
  3. Riser v. Federal Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1929
  4. Forest View Land Co. v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of Virginia · 1917
  5. Burnet v. Corp. of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1827

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. City Gas Company v. Peoples Gas System, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1965
  2. Tench v. WeaverWyoming Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. v. Williams Electric Cooperative, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1959
  4. Dickinson v. Maine Public Service CompanySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1968
  5. McClintock v. Cain, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division1956

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API