Cannon v. Wickham

89 A. 21, 242 Pa. 16, 1913 Pa. LEXIS 828
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJune 27, 1913
DocketAppeal, No. 161
StatusPublished

This text of 89 A. 21 (Cannon v. Wickham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cannon v. Wickham, 89 A. 21, 242 Pa. 16, 1913 Pa. LEXIS 828 (Pa. 1913).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This appeal is from an order awarding a preliminary injunction restraining the defendants from entering upon land of the plaintiffs or interfering with them in their use and enjoyment thereof. The errors assigned are to the admission of testimony and to the refusal of the court to dismiss the bill for want of jurisdiction in equity or to certify it to the law side of the court. The first will not be considered as the testimony is not set out in the assignments and the second is without merit. The bill was not an ejectment bill since it was alleged that the title of the land and the right of possession had been determined to be in the plaintiff by adjudications [18]*18that were final and conclusive. This allegation was sustained by proof at the hearing. On an appeal from the granting or refusal of a preliminary injunction we do not consider the merits further than to determine whether there was reasonable ground for the action of the court: Delaware & Hudson Co. v. Olyphant Borough, 224 Pa. 387.

The appeal is dismissed at the cost of the appellant.

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

Related

Delaware & Hudson Co. v. Olyphant Borough
73 A. 458 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1909)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
89 A. 21, 242 Pa. 16, 1913 Pa. LEXIS 828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cannon-v-wickham-pa-1913.