Skip to main content
· 3/5/1894

Hinchman v. Phila. & West Chester Turnpike Road

Citations

  • 160 Pa. 150
  • 34 W.N.C. 129
  • 28 A. 652
  • 1894 Pa. LEXIS 785

Syllabus

<p>Railroads — Turnpike companies — Street railways — Sale of railroad— Act of March 15, 1865.</p> <p>Where a turnpike company is authorized by an act of assembly to purchase the road, property and franchises of a passenger railroad company, and is invested with the like powers, privileges and immunities as the railroad company, but with authority to remove the tracks, the turnpike company may, after the expiration of twenty-seven years, rebuild and operate the railroad.</p> <p>Corporations — Charter—Forfeiture—Act of Feb. 19, 1849.</p> <p>In such a ease the removal of the rails and the sale of the cars and property formerly belonging to the railroad in pursuance of an express legislative authority, raises no implication of abandonment or other disability as to the future exercise of the fraiichises. The provision of the act of Feb. 19, 1849, as to forfeiture, does not apply to such case.</p> <p>No charter to a corporation for public purposes can be forfeited except by the commonwealth in a direct proceeding for that purpose.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “[B]eing laid off because of modernization is, in fact, a normal working condition.”
  • notification of elimination of job positions held \normal\ part of work conditions and not compensable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Dean, Fell, Green, Mitchell, Sterrett

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.