Dakota Cent. Telephone Co. v. City of Huron
Decision Date | 03 November 1908 |
Citation | 165 F. 226 |
Parties | DAKOTA CENTRAL TELEPHONE CO. v. CITY OF HURON. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of South Dakota |
This cause has been submitted upon bill, cross-bill, answers thereto, and a stipulation of facts. From the stipulation the following material facts appear:
The Dakota Central Telephone Company is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the state of South Dakota on August 30, 1904, with power to purchase, lease, construct and operate telephone lines and exchanges. The defendant is a municipal corporation of South Dakota. On January 28, 1898 at the request of one J. L. W. Zeitlow, the city council of the defendant duly passed the following ordinance:
'Passed at a regular session of the city council, March 11, 1898.'
On April 8, 1898, said Zeitlow filed with the city clerk of defendant the following acceptance of said ordinance:
J. L. W. Zeitlow.'
Zeitlow duly constructed and completed the telephone lines and system mentioned in said ordinance, and operated the same until the year 1904, when the complainant purchased the same and has ever since owned and operated said telephone system. The complainant has invested in said telephone system the sum of $25,000, and furnishes telephone service to about 820 subscribers therewith. On July 14, 1907, the city council of defendant passed the following resolution, and caused a copy of the same to be served upon complainant:
On January 24, 1908, the city council of the city of Huron passed the following resolution:
'The city council of the city of Huron does hereby resolve that the franchise now held by J. L. W. Zeitlow to maintain telephone system in the city of Huron, which expires on the 11th day of March, 1908, will not be renewed.
--and caused a copy thereof to be served upon complainant. The defendant through its officers threaten to remove by force the poles and lines of complainant's telephone system from the streets of said defendant. On this record complainant prays that the defendant be perpetually enjoined from tearing down and removing its telephone poles and lines as threatened, and the defendant prays by its cross-bill that the complainant be compelled within a reasonable time to remove said poles and lines from its streets for the reason only that the time limit fixed in the ordinance of January 28, 1898, has expired, and that the said poles and lines now constitute a public nuisance.
T. H. Null and W. A. Lynch, for complainant.
A. B. Fairbank and A. K. Gardner, for defendant.
CARLAND, District Judge (after stating the facts as above).
The following provisions of statutory law relate to the questions raised on this record:
'To provide for the lighting of streets and public grounds, the laying down of gas pipes and erection of lamp posts, lines for conveying electric light and telegraph and telephone lines and to regulate the distribution, use and sale of gas and other illuminating fluids. ' Paragraph 11 of section 7 of the charter of the city of Huron.
'No street passenger, railway or telegraph or telephone line shall be constructed within the limits of any village, town or city without the consent of its local authorities. ' Article 10, Sec. 3, Const. S.D.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Chesapeake & Potomac Tel. Co. of W. Va. v. City of Morgantown, 11017
...... 107 S.E.2d 489 . 144 W.Va. 149 . THE CHESAPEAKE & POTOMAC TELEPHONE COMPANY OF WEST VIRGINIA . v. . CITY OF MORGANTOWN. . No. 11017. . ...Illinois Northern Utilities Co., 363 Ill. 89, 1 N.E.2d 392; Dakota Central Tel. Co. v. City of Huron, C.C., 165 F. 226; 5 A.L.R. 36; 39 ......
-
State ex inf. McKittrick ex rel. City of Lebanon v. Missouri Standard Telephone Co.
......St. 4, 7 A. 778;. State v. Mayor, etc., City of Jersey City, 8 A. 126;. Dakota Central Tel. Co. v. Huron, 165 F. 231. (b) If. this condition implies a grant of power to cities ......
-
Eastern Shore Public Service Co. v. The Town of Seaford
...... roads, highways, streets, avenues and alleys of the city,. town and district in or upon which the said posts or ...Basing their contention upon the authority of. Dakota Central Telephone Co. v. City of Huron,. (C. C.) 165 F. ......
-
Town of Seaford v. E. Shore Pub. Serv. Co.
...has never conferred. In this connection the Pennsylvania Company cites Dakota 2 A.2d 262 Central Telephone Co. v. City of Huron, C.C., 165 F. 226, where it was held that if a grant by the State of a franchise to a telephone company to use the public thoroughfare was conditioned on the conse......