Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 4.djvu/55

 LATHEOP V. jnNC. E. CO. el ���Lathrop and others v. The Junction Eailboad Companï and others.* �(Cireuit Court, E D. Penmylvania. October 28, 1880.) �1. RAIIiROAD— OwNEIiSHtP OF SECTION OF ROAD FORMING PaRT OF THE �LiNB OF Akothbr Company in which it is a Stociuiolder — Rigiit OF Lattbr Company to Use buciï Section — Pkelimixary Injuno- TioN. — A railroad was built f or the purpose of uniting tliree other roads, which were the principal owners of ils corporate stock. One of these thiee other roads allowed a portion of Ihe uniting road to be located over its property, and built that portion at its own expense. Subsequently it claimed the exclusive control over that portion, and refused to allow the uniting road to transport freight and passengers thereon. Hdd, that although it might have a proprietary rigi.t in that portion of the road, it was bound to allow the uniting road a reasonable use thereof, as a part of the latter'scontinuous line. Held, further, that the right to such use might be enforced by a prelimiuary injunction restraining the company owning the portion of road from interfering with the transportaliuu uf the treight and passengers car- ried by the uniting road. �Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. �This was a bill in equity filed by two stocliholders of the Junction Eailroad Company against the Junction Eailroad Company and the Pennsylvania Railroad Company. The bill alleged that the Junction Eailroad Company was by law obliged, under certain regulations, to transport freight and passengers over its road, but that it had, in consequence of a claim of the Pennsylvania Eailroad Company to the exclu- sive property in and eontrol over a portion of its road, refused to transport freight of the Baltimore & Ohio Eailroad Com- pany, in course of transmission from Baltimore to New York, by means of a route in which the Junction Eailroad was a Connecting link. The bill prayed for an injunction restrain- ing the Junction Eailroad Company from declining or refusing to transport such freight, and restraining the Pennsylvania Eailroad Company from interfering with such transportation. �The Pennsylvania Eailroad Company filed an answer as- serting an exclusive right to and over a section of road form- �*Prepared by Frank P. Prichard, Esq., of the Philadelphia bar. ����