L. R., M. R. & T. R'y Co. v. Shelton & Wells

Supreme Court of Arkansas

L. R., M. R. & T. R'y Co. v. Shelton & Wells

45 Ark. 446

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedNovember 15, 1885

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 45 Ark. 446 (L. R., M. R. & T. R'y Co. v. Shelton & Wells) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

L. R., M. R. & T. R'y Co. v. Shelton & Wells, 45 Ark. 446 (Ark. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

Cockrill, C. J.

This case is controlled by the 'decision in Hot Springs Railway v. Williamson, ante. No distinction can be drawn, for the purpose of maintaining the action, between obstructing ■ the access to premises by the erection of an embankment in the street, as in that case, and by making a cut next to the plaintiff’s premises, as in this. Caledonia R’y v. Walker's trustees, 35 Moak, 177, and cases collected in the note.

Affirm.

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

Cockrill, C. J.

This case is controlled by the 'decision in Hot Springs Railway v. Williamson, ante. No distinction can be drawn, for the purpose of maintaining the action, between obstructing ■ the access to premises by the erection of an embankment in the street, as in that case, and by making a cut next to the plaintiff’s premises, as in this. Caledonia R’y v. Walker's trustees, 35 Moak, 177, and cases collected in the note.

Affirm.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 Ark. 446, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/l-r-m-r-t-ry-co-v-shelton-wells-ark-1885.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack