Strasburg Railroad Company v. Echternacht

Decision Date01 May 1853
Citation21 Pa. 220
PartiesStrasburg Railroad Company versus Echternacht.
CourtPennsylvania Supreme Court

CERTIORARI to the Common Pleas of Lancaster county.

Eshelman, for the Company.

It is not a sufficient objection to the jurisdiction of a Court of Equity that the complainant has a remedy at law, unless such remedy be adequate and complete: Brightly's Rep. 203, Skilton v. Webster; 1 Parsons 220; Id. 541; 4 Wash. C. C. Rep. 205; 10 Barr, Wesley Church v. Moore; 2 Story's Eq., sec. 716-724; 2 Kent 448; 2 Jones 56.

Where a bill prayed for specific performance of a contract for the purchase of a quantity of timber, performance was decreed: 3 Atk. 383. Also cited 12 Sim. 189; 1 Wheaton 151; 1 Peters 304; 1 Parsons 479.

The plaintiffs, the company, not being a party to the agreement, may not be able to maintain an action at law; their only remedy may be in equity: 1 Sim. & Stu. 598.

Hood, contrà.—No contract is set out in the bill. There were no contracting parties to the agreement, and no legal consideration to support a promise is set out in it. There is no privity between the company and the defendant: 1 Dan. Ch. Prac. 427. If it be a contract it is one to procure legislation and is void: 5 W. & Ser. 320-2; 5 Barr 452. A contract as to which there is not mutual obligation and mutual remedy, will not be enforced in equity: 10 Mod. 506; 1 W. & Ser. 555; 2 Peere Will. 304. Nor where there is an adequate and complete remedy at law: Act of 16 June, 1836; 1 Pars. Eq. 41, 479. In this case the measure of damages would be the difference between the current price of the stock and its par value.

There is a distinction between cases where the stock or other chattel is required to be given up to the plaintiff, and those in which the defendant is required to take it. In the first class of cases no amount of damages may be able to compensate the loss of the thing itself. In the second, the loss may be always compensated in damages: 2 Story's Equity, sec. 716, et seq.

When a party has no right of action at law, he has none in equity.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by BLACK, C. J.

Before the Strasburg Railroad Company was incorporated, the defendant and others signed a paper, agreeing that if it should be incorporated with certain privileges, they would subscribe the number of shares set opposite to their respective names. The charter was obtained, and the defendant refused to take the stock. Whereupon the company brought this bill in equity to enforce specific performance of the contract.

A contract cannot be made by one person alone. It takes two to make a bargain. Before a promise becomes a binding obligation, it must not only be made to, but must be expressly or impliedly accepted by, the party...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Pugh v. Gressett
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • October 13, 1924
    ... ... R. A. 514; Deitz v ... Stephenson, 51 Ore. 596, 95 P. 803; Strasburg R. Co ... v. Echpernacht, 21 Pa. 220, 60 Am. Dec. 49; ... Chilhowie ... R. A. (N. S.) [136 Miss ... 666] 637; Yazoo & M. V. Railroad Co. v. Jones, 114 ... Miss. 787; Pioneer Co. v. Price, 96 So. 103; ... corporation were carried on the books of the company at ... fifty-five thousand dollars. There were admitted liabilities, ... ...
  • Jeannette Bottle Works v. Schall
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Superior Court
    • March 21, 1900
    ...incorporation, is unsound. The position of appellant upon this question is thought to be sustained by the decisions in Strasburg R. R. Co. v. Echternacht, 21 Pa. 220; Hedge and Horn's Appeal, 63 Pa. 273, and Boyd v. Peach Bottom R. R., 90 Pa. 169. In the case last named, it was held that th......
  • Hamilton v. Clarion, M. & P. R. Co.
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • October 5, 1891
    ... ... creditors of the Clarion, Mahoning & Pittsburgh Railroad ... Company, who, contributing to the expenses of this suit, may ... afterwards refused to do so: Strasburg R. Co. v ... Echternacht, 21 Pa. 220; Cook on Stock, etc., § ... 186 ... ...
  • Metzger v. Cruikshank
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Superior Court
    • March 8, 1948
    ...remove a case from the general rule that specific performance of a sale of chattels will not be decreed (Strasburg R. Co. v. Echternacht, 21 Pa. 220, 60 Am.Dec. 49; Foll's Appeal, 91 Pa. 434, 36 Am.Rep. 671; Rigg v. Reading S. W. Railroad Co., 191 Pa. 298, 43 A. 212) there must be some uniq......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT