General Elec. Co. v. C. S. W. & C. Ry.
This text of 1 Ohio Law. Abs. 402 (General Elec. Co. v. C. S. W. & C. Ry.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Epitomized Opinion
On Motion
F. H. Wilson, receiver, applied for further instru tions respecting the relocation of tracks in Riversic Drive, Cleveland, formerly West Park. The Count Commissioners who have let the contract for the ri paving of Riverside Drive join in the request.
The present paving contract provides for the pa1 ing of a driveway on each side of the center of tl highway and an abandonment of the pavement a [403]*403ready constructed. The Railway Co. has been or-lered to remove its tracks from the part to be paved md replace them on the part formerly paved, but low to be abandoned. In any case it will be necessary for the old paving in the center of the road to ie removed, but, in case the order of the city is carded out, the expense must all be borne by the Railway. Held by the Federal Court:
1.The municipality has no right, under the guise )f an exercise of its police power, to require removal if railway tracks to get grading and other work done it the expense of the Railway Co. This would be an infair and unreasonable burden and the county and :ity will be enjoined, if necessary, from imposing such a burden.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Ohio Law. Abs. 402, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/general-elec-co-v-c-s-w-c-ry-ohnd-1924.