Fidelity Trust & Safety Vault Co. v. Mobile Street Ry. Co.
| Decision Date | 22 October 1892 |
| Citation | 53 F. 687 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Alabama |
| Parties | FIDELITY TRUST & SAFETY VAULT CO. v. MOBILE ST. RY. CO. [1] |
The Mobile Street Railway Company defaulted in the payment of interest on its bonds, and a bill was filed by the complainant above named, as trustee under the mortgage, to foreclose the mortgage and sell the property, and a receiver was appointed. During the progress of the cause the city of Mobile passed an ordinance authorizing another street railway company to lay its track partly within and partly without the rails of the Mobile Street Railway Company, for five blocks in the business portion of the city, on Dauphin street, and run cars by electricity over this and the rest of an extensive route not otherwise conflicting. The Mobile Street Railway Company had been granted the right by the city previously to substitute electricity for mules, but had not up to the filing of the bill in this cause, taken any steps in that direction, nor did the receiver make or contemplate any change. The competing grantee, the Mobile Electric Railway Company, proceeded to erect poles on the margins of Dauphin street with the view of availing itself of its franchise, when the receiver made this motion for an injunction.
Clark & Clark and Overall, Bestor & Gray, for receiver.
S. T Prince and G. L. & H. T. Smith, for Mobile Electric Ry. Co.
Under the facts of this case, the court has arrived at the following conclusions:
1. The court will protect its receiver in the possession and proper use and management of the property and privileges, and franchises pertaining thereto, committed to him.
2. And the court will extend such protection even to restraining another railroad company from proceeding to condemn, or to subject to its use, property in the possession of its receiver, by proper legal proceedings, and will more readily do so when such condemnation or use is sought or attempted to be had without any legal proceedings being taken for that purpose.
3. The acts done, or threatened and proposed to be done, to the right of way and roadbed and franchises connected with the Mobile Street Railway Company, and now possessed and exercised by the receiver, and the use proposed to be made thereof by the Mobile Electric Railway Company, will, in my opinion, materially impair the just enjoyment of the same by the said receiver.
4. One public corporation cannot take the franchises of another public...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Northwestern Telephone Exchange Company v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company
... ... which the power is delegated holds it in trust. The ... legislature is the only custodian of ... Paul & N.P.R. Co., 37 Minn. 164; ... Fidelity T. & S.V. Co. v. Mobile St. Ry. Co., 53 F ... ...
-
St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company v. Fayetteville
...Elliott, Roads & Streets, § 219; Dill. Mun. Corp. § 588. Such power is not contained in our statute. 14 Am. & Eng. R. Cas. 34; 10 F. 497; 53 F. 687; 103 N.Y. 10; Roads & Streets, § 779; 37 N.J.L. 77. There was no necessity shown, by the proof for the crossing. 56 Mich. 244; Elliott, Roads &......
-
Guaranty Trust Co. of New York v. Fentress
...damage. In re Tyler, 149 U. S. 164, 13 S. Ct. 785, 37 L. Ed. 689; McMullen v. Hurley (C. C. A.) 291 F. 374; Fidelity Trust & Safety-Vault Co. v. Mobile St. R. Co. (C. C.) 53 F. 687; Ledoux v. La Bee (C. C.) 83 F. 761; Brady v. South Shore Traction Co. (D. C.) 197 F. 669; Westinghouse Electr......
-
Africa v. City of Knoxville
... ... certain street-railroad companies formed for the purpose of ... 628, ... 12 C.C.A. 365; Baltimore Trust & Guarantee Co. v. Mayor, ... etc., of City of ... cases in note (24 N.E. 1054); Port of Mobile v ... Louisville & N.R. Co. (Ala.) 4 South ... same effect is the case of Fidelity Trust & Safety Vault ... Co. v. Mobile St. Ry ... ...