Ohio Valley Water Co. v. Ben Avon Borough

251 U.S. 542, 40 S. Ct. 583, 64 L. Ed. 405, 1920 U.S. LEXIS 667
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Ohio Valley Water Co. v. Ben Avon Borough. Read the opinion of the Court — 253 U.S. 287
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided October 15, 1919·No. No. 128·Published

Opinion

PerTturiam.

The attention of counsel is directed to the question of whether under the state law the right to review the action of the commission was limited by the state statutes to the particular remedy which was here resorted to, or whether such statutes left open the right to invoke judicial power by way of independent suit for the purpose of redressing wrongs deemed to have resulted from action taken by the commission. Mr. William Watson Smith and Mr. George B. Gordon, with whom Mr. $ohn G. Buchanan was on the briefs, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Berne H. Evans and Mr. Leonard K. Guiler, with whom Mr. David L. Starr and Mr. Albert G. Liddell were on the briefs, for defendants in error.

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

Ohio Valley Water Co. v. Ben Avon Borough, 251 U.S. 542, 40 S. Ct. 583, 64 L. Ed. 405, 1920 U.S. LEXIS 667 (1919).

251 U.S. 542 (Ohio Valley Water Co. v. Ben Avon Borough) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.