Glenwood Light & Water Co. v. Mutual Light, Heat & Power Co.
Citations
- 239 U.S. 121
- 36 S. Ct. 30
- 60 L. Ed. 174
- 1915 U.S. LEXIS 1503
Syllabus
<p>The jurisdictional amount involved in suits for injunction to restrain nuisance or a continuing trespass is to be tested by the value of the object to be gained by complainant.</p> <p>The amount involved in a suit brought by a telephone company to restrain another company from so erecting poles and wires as to injure complainant’s poles, wires and business, held, in this case, not to be the expense of defendant’s removing its conflicting poles and wires but the value of the right of complainant to maintain and operate its plant and conduct its business free from wrongful interference by defendant.</p> <p>Complainant’s right to conduct its business free from the acts of de- ■ fendant sought to be enjoined having an uncontroverted value of $3,000, held that the District Court had jurisdiction under Judicial Code, § 24, so far as jurisdictional amount in controversy is concerned.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- value of maintenance and operation of electric power plant is correct jurisdictional valuation, not the cost of removal of defendant’s interfering power lines
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Pitney
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.