Commonwealth v. Allen
Citations
- 148 Pa. 358
- 23 A. 1115
- 1892 Pa. LEXIS 986
Syllabus
<p>[Marked to be reported.]</p> <p>Criminal law — Obstruction of highways — Nuisance—Indictable offence.</p> <p>At common law any obstruction which, unnecessarily incommodes or impedes the lawful use of a highway by the public is a nuisance and indictable as such.</p> <p>A man may lawfully use a public highway in the transaction of his legitimate business, either for travel or for transportation, but such use must be reasonable, and the question of its reasonableness is to be determined by the jury.</p> <p>Traction engine — Use of steam, on highways — Act of June 30, 1885.</p> <p>The running of a traction engine over a public highway upon a single occasion would not constitute a public nuisance, as it might be necessary in order to remove it from one location to another.</p> <p>This necessity is recognized by the act of June 30, 1885, P. L. 251. This act was restrictive legislation. It was not intended to license the unrestricted use of steam upon the public highways of the commonwealth.</p> <p>Defendants operated a stone quarry from which they had been in the habit of hauling stone in the ordinary manner by horses. They procured a traction engine, by means of which they began hauling stone in two wagons, making a train from fifty to fifty-five feet long, which weighed when loaded from thirteen to fourteen tons, with which they made two trips daily from their quarry to the railroad station, a distance of about three miles. There was evidence that the train by its noise and appearance interfered with travel over the road by frightening horses, and that it obstructed travel.</p> <p>Held, That such use of the highway constituted a nuisance and the maintenance of it an indictable offence.</p> <p>Highways and bridges — Duties of township — Extraordinary use — Unusual loads.</p> <p>Highways and bridges are constructed for ordinary use in an ordinary manner, and not for an unusual or extraordinary use, either by crossing at great speed or by the passing of a very large and
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- quarry operator created public nuisance by inhibiting public’s use of road and bridges with “traction engine”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Hevueick, McCollum, Paxson, Sterrett, Williams
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
8 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Cranor v. 5 Star NutritionFifth Circuit· 2021-05-26· cited 29×
- Ford v. Riverside City School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1953-11-25· cited 18×
- Radnor Township v. BellSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1904-12-12· cited 7×
- Commonwealth v. DennisonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1911-07-13· cited 5×
- Hall v. North Montgomery Materials, LLCCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama· 2008-06-13· cited 4×
- Commonwealth v. DoughtySuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1913-10-13· cited 3×
- Pool v. VanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1909-02-26· cited 1×
- McCarter v. Ludlum Steel & Spring Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery· 1906-03-29· cited 1×
Cites
1 case in this archive is cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.