Skip to main content
· 5/25/1908

Hannum v. Media, Middletown, Aston & Chester Electric Railway Co.

Citations

  • 221 Pa. 454
  • 70 A. 847
  • 1908 Pa. LEXIS 513

Syllabus

<p>Appeals — Equity—Equity practice — Reinstating bill.</p> <p>Where the Supreme Court in reversing a decree dismissing a bill in equity directs that the bill be reinstated, and an injunction awarded, with leave to the defendant to move the court below to open the case for further testimony, the effect of the order of reversal is to restore the case to exactly the standing it had before the decree dismissing the bill had beenentered, and the court below may proceed to take additional testimony and may, without exceeding its authority, again dismiss the bill.</p> <p>Street railways — Branch of extension — Street already occupied.</p> <p>A property owner has no standing to complain of a street railway company using a street already occupied by an existing railway, where it appears that the company does not contemplate the construction of a branch of its own on the street, but purposes to use the existing track to link all the branches of the company with its main trunk line.</p> <p>A street railway authorized by its charter to build branches and extensions, may employ as a connecting link between its main line and the proposed extensions or branches, the tracks of another company for a short distance, under agreement with the latter company. In such case the statutory prohibition against the construction of a line of railway upon a street already occupied by a railway has no application.</p> <p>The charter of a railroad company may not authorize the company to construct, maintain and operate a railway on any street already occupied by the.tracks of a railway; but in case of branches and extensions the prohibition is limited merely to the construction in any street on which a track of another company has been laid. If the younger company secures from the older company the right to use a short portion of the latter’s lines, so as to make a necessary connection between branches and the chartered route, it in no way violates the law.</p> <p>The grant to the company of the

Judges: Brown, Elkin, Mestrezat, Mitchell, Stewart

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.