Freshwater v. Pittsburgh, Wheeling & Kentucky R. R.
Freshwater v. Pittsburgh, Wheeling & Kentucky R. R.
Opinion of the Court
This is a bill of injunction filed by tbe Plaintiff against tbe Defendant in the Circuit Court of tbe county of Brooke.
The Plaintiff in his bill alleges substantially that be is tbe fee simple owner of a tract of 160 acres, more or less, situated in said county. That tbe Defendant is a corporation authorized by tbe law to construct a railroad in this State. That on tbe 3rd da3r of December 1869, tbe Defendadt served a notice on the Plaintiff, that application would be made for tbe appointment of commissioners to ascertain a just compensation to tbe Plaintiff, for the tract or parcel of land which tbe Defendant proposed to take and appropriate for tbe purpose of locating and constructing a railroad thereon, called tbe Panhandle Railroad. That on tbe 24th day of December 1869, the Defendant filed its wriften application in said Circuit Court for tbe appointment of commissioners for the purpose aforesaid. That among other things tbe application discribed tbe land of Plaintiff which Defendant proposed to take and appropriate for tbe purpose of its road. That afterwards such proceedings were bad in tbe matter of said application, that tbe Circuit Court appointed five disinterested freeholders of said county for tbe purpose aforesaid. That afterwards, tbe commissioners having been qualified according to law, entered upon tbe discharge of their duties as such, and on the-day of April 1870, after having viewed the land of
From the order of the Judge granting the injunction an appeal has been taken to this Court.
In considering and determining the questions arising in this cause, the bill being verified by affidavit, we arc compelled to regard the allegations contained therein as being prima facie true. The injunction was awarded by the Judge in vacation, without notice to the Defendant, and the proceeding was altogether ex parte. Taking the allegations of the bill as being prima facie true, we think the bill shews on its face sufficient equity to authorize the granting of the injunction as it was allowed by the Judge of the Circuit Court.
This Court, in considering the appeal from the order granting the injunction, cannot consider any deposition
Nor these reasons the order of the Judge of the Circuit Court of Brooke county, allowing the Plaintiff the injunction herein named, must be affirmed, and the Ap-pellee recover his costs in this Court, and $30 damages against the Appellant; but this order of affirmance is without prejudice to the Appellant’s right to appeal according to law, from any order or decree which was made in the causa.by the Judge of the Circuit Court of Brooke county in vacation, or by said Circuit Court after the order granting said injunction, or which may hereafter be made therein ; and also without prej udice to any right of the Appellant hereafter to move to dissolve said injunction, or to-take such other proceedings in the cause as are in accordance with the principles and rules of a court of equity.
And the cause must be remanded to the Circuit Court of Brooke county, for further proceedings therein to be had according to the rules governing courts of equity.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Freshwater v. Pittsburgh, Wheeling and Kentucky R. R. Co. George Freshwater, and against the Pittsburgh, Wheeling and Kentucky Railroad Company, and
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Syllabus. 1. In considering and determining an appeal from an order of a judge,, of a circuit court allowing an injunction, the bill being properly verified by tlio affidavit of the plaintiff, and the proceeding bejng altogether ex parte, the appellate court must talce and consider the allegations of the bill as being ¡irima facie true. 2. Talcing the allegations of the bill as being prima facie true, the order of injunction appealed from, was properly made, sufficient equity appearing on the face of the bill. 3. On an appeal from a preliminary order of injunction, made by a judge of a circuit court, in vacation, the appellate court will not consider any depositions in the cause taken by the appellant subsequent to the time such order of injunction took effect.