Union Street Ry. v. Hazleton & North Side Electric Ry.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Union Street Ry. v. Hazleton & North Side Electric Ry.

26 A. 557, 154 Pa. 422, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 908

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMay 1, 1893

DocketAppeal, No. 441

StatusPublished

This text of 26 A. 557 (Union Street Ry. v. Hazleton & North Side Electric Ry.) 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

Union Street Ry. v. Hazleton & North Side Electric Ry., 26 A. 557, 154 Pa. 422, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 908 (Pa. 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion’by

Mr. Chiee Justice Stebbett,

In disposing of interlocutory decrees such as this, we deem it better, as a general rule, not to express any opinion as to the merits of the controversy, for the reason that the facts, as they may be developed hereafter, are not fully before us; and any premature expression of opinion, on questions that appear to be involved, might prove to be misleading in further proceedings, if any should be had, before a master or on- final hearing in the court below. This case cannot be regarded as an exception to the rule. '

The only question now presented for our consideration is, whether the preliminary injunction complained of should have been continued. Upon due consideration of the injunction affidavits and proofs on which the learned court appears to have acted in making the decree, we think there was error in doing so.

Decree reversed and preliminary injunction dissolved, at ap pellee’s cost.

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

Opinion’by

Mr. Chiee Justice Stebbett,

In disposing of interlocutory decrees such as this, we deem it better, as a general rule, not to express any opinion as to the merits of the controversy, for the reason that the facts, as they may be developed hereafter, are not fully before us; and any premature expression of opinion, on questions that appear to be involved, might prove to be misleading in further proceedings, if any should be had, before a master or on- final hearing in the court below. This case cannot be regarded as an exception to the rule. '

The only question now presented for our consideration is, whether the preliminary injunction complained of should have been continued. Upon due consideration of the injunction affidavits and proofs on which the learned court appears to have acted in making the decree, we think there was error in doing so.

Decree reversed and preliminary injunction dissolved, at ap pellee’s cost.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A. 557, 154 Pa. 422, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 908, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/union-street-ry-v-hazleton-north-side-electric-ry-pa-1893.