Postal Tel. Cable Co. of N.J. v. Del., L. & W. R. Co.
| Citation | 104 A. 141 |
| Decision Date | 13 June 1918 |
| Docket Number | No. 41/648.,41/648. |
| Parties | POSTAL TELEGRAPH CABLE CO. OF NEW JERSEY v. DELAWARE, L. & W. R. CO. et al. |
| Court | New Jersey Court of Chancery |
Suit by the Postal Telegraph Cable Company of New Jersey against the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company and others. Decree dismissing the bill advised.
Vredenburgh, Wall & Carey, of Jersey City, for complainant. W. J. Larrabee, of New York City, for Delaware, L. & W. R. Co. F. W. Van Blarcom, of Paterson, for Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Passaic. W. B. Gourley, of Paterson, for Township of Acquackononk.
This cause is submitted upon the pleadings and a stipulation of facts, from which it appears that the River road in the township of Acquackononk in the county of Passaic is a public highway which was crossed by the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad at grade; that said River road is a post road within the meaning of the act of Congress, within the lines of which the complainant had erected its telegraph poles carrying wires for the transmission of messages. The railroad company and the township and county authorities entered into an agreement to change the grade of the River road to abolish the grade crossing, under Laws 1903, p. 661, §§ 30, 31, Comp. Stat. p. 4234 (section 30 amended P. L. 1915, p. 98, 1 Supp. Comp. Stat. p. 1299). In doing the work it became necessary to temporarily remove the telegraph poles and wires of the complainant to a point outside the lines of highway, anticipating which the complainant filed its bill to restrain this disturbance, and obtained an order to show cause, with restraint, upon the hearing of which an order was entered on the 19th day of June, 1916, on motion of the solicitors of all the parties, which, after permitting the work to be proceeded with, ordered as follows:
"Further ordered, that the question, which of the parties shall be liable for the cost and expense of such relocation or reconstruction and the restoration of said poles and lines to within the lines of said River road upon the completion of said improvement, and the costs on said order allowed June 3, 1916, abide the final decree of this court."
The complainant thereafter removed its poles, wires, etc., outside the lines of the road, and restored the same after the change of grade was completed, at an expense of $1,137.63.
The question now presented is which of the parties should bear tills expense. First, are the municipalities liable?
If the complainant sought to enjoin the municipalities from changing the grade of the road because it...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Port of New York Authority v. Hackensack Water Co.
...a century ago in Jersey City v. City of Hudson, 13 N.J.Eq. 420 (Ch.1861), and was later restated in Postal Tel. Cable Co. v. Delaware, L. & W.R.R., 89 N.J.Eq. 99, 104 A. 141 (Ch.1918), affirmed o.b. 90 N.J.Eq. 273, 106 A. 892 (E. & A. 1919); see also Walker v. North Bergen, 84 N.J.L. 248, 8......
-
Port of New York Authority v. Public Service Elec. & Gas Co.
...to that litigation, their legislatively granted franchise rights were not properly before the court. Postal Tel. Cable Co. v. D.L. & W.R.R. Co., 89 N.J.Eq. 99, 104 A. 141 (Ch. 1918), affirmed, 90 N.J.Eq. 273, 106 A. 892 (E. & A.1919), presented the question whether either the municipality o......
-
SB Penick & Co. v. New York Cent. R. Co.
...carried out under the state police power a grade crossing elimination required for public safety. See Postal Telegraph Cable Co. v. Delaware, L. & W. R. Co., 89 N.J.Eq. 99, 104 A. 141, affirmed, 90 N.J.Eq. 273, 106 A. We conclude therefore that the appellee railroads must be deemed to be wi......
-
Port of New York Authority v. Hackensack Water Co.
...or necessity requires. Walker v. Township of North Bergen, 84 N.J.L. 248, 86 A. 63 (Sup.Ct.1913); Postal Telegraph Cable Co. v. Delaware L. & W.R.R. Co., 89 N.J.Eq. 99, 104 A. 141 (Ch.1918) affirmed o.b., 90 N.J.Eq. 273, 106 A. 892 (E. & A. 1919); New Jersey Bell Tel. Co. v. Delaware River ......