Messner v. Railway Co.
Messner v. Railway Co.
Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
The decree, entered by the court below in discharging the rule for a preliminary injunction, imposed such terms upon the defendant company as will fully secure all damages that the plaintiff has suffered in consequence of the construction and operation of the street railway on the public highway on which his property abuts.
In the light of the testimony, it is apparent that the plaintiff’s principal purpose in purchasing this property was to harass the defendant company. The case as presented is marked with such questionable methods as to prevent the plaintiff from securing equitable relief. The findings of fact by the court below are sufficient to justify the decree made, and while there are conspicuous errors of practice in the proceeding, they are harmless so far as the decree is concerned.
The decree is affirmed.
Reference
- Cited By
- 3 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Injunction not of right, when good conscience does not require it. An injunction is not of right. It will not be issued when upon a broad consideration of the situation of all the parties in interest, good conscience does not require it. Trolley railway — Consent of abutting owner — Injunction when refused. An injunction to restrain the completion of a trolley track will not be 'granted when it appears that plaintiff’s principal purpose in purchasing ■the property, the prior owner of which had verbally consented to the railroad, was to harass the defendant company, and when the case as presented is marked with such questionable methods as to prevent the plaintiff from deserving equitable relief. He will be remitted to his remedy at law upon defendant filling security for payment of such «damages as may be recovered.