Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Baker

131 S.E. 678, 134 S.C. 106, 1926 S.C. LEXIS 12
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedFebruary 3, 1926
Docket11916
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 131 S.E. 678 (Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Baker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Baker, 131 S.E. 678, 134 S.C. 106, 1926 S.C. LEXIS 12 (S.C. 1926).

Opinions

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Watts.

This action is brought for the purpose of restraining the defendant from erecting a filling station upon land claimed *113 by the plaintiff as a part of its right of way. On hearing a rule to show cause why an injunction pendente lite should not be granted, Judge Dennis refused to grant the injunction and the plaintiff appealed.

An order was granted by a member of this Court, staying proceedings until the appeal could be heard. The plaintiff has a plain and adequate remedy at law to establish its easement. It does not allege that it needs the easement at present, and if the defendant owns the property, she would have a right to use it, subject to the easement, if the plaintiff has such easement, and until the plaintiff needs the easement.

It is true that the plaintiff was required to commence suit when the property was used antagonistic to its claim, but let the plaintiff establish its right on the law side of the Court. I am not in favor of government too much by injunction, and for this reason do not think the injunction should be granted.

Let the order of Judge Dennis be reported.

Affirmed.

Mr. Chiee Justice Gary and Mr. Acting Associate Justice R. O. Purdy concur. Messrs. Justices Coti-iran and Marion dissent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ex parte Jones
158 S.E. 134 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1931)
Seabrook v. Carolina Power & Light Co.
156 S.E. 1 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1930)
Forkner v. Louisville Nashville Railroad Company
24 S.W.2d 290 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1930)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
131 S.E. 678, 134 S.C. 106, 1926 S.C. LEXIS 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/atlantic-coast-line-r-co-v-baker-sc-1926.