Pittsburgh Junction Railroad v. McCutcheon

7 A. 146, 4 Sadler 245, 18 Week. No. 527, 1886 Pa. LEXIS 885
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedNovember 15, 1886
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 7 A. 146 (Pittsburgh Junction Railroad v. McCutcheon) 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
Pittsburgh Junction Railroad v. McCutcheon, 7 A. 146, 4 Sadler 245, 18 Week. No. 527, 1886 Pa. LEXIS 885 (Pa. 1886).

Opinion

Per Curiam:

There is nothing in this case that requires a reversal of the court helow. The amendment was properly allowed, and under the new Constitution the plaintiff was entitled to compensation for all the damages, direct or consequential, which he suffered or might suffer in consequence of the building and operation of the defendant’s road. The judgment is affirmed.

Let a like judgment be entered in the case of the Pittsburgh Junction R. Co. v. George Smith, which was argued with the above.

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

Related

Geiger v. Madden
58 Pa. Super. 616 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 A. 146, 4 Sadler 245, 18 Week. No. 527, 1886 Pa. LEXIS 885, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pittsburgh-junction-railroad-v-mccutcheon-pa-1886.