Constructive - Judgment Search Results

Construction Co. Vs. Cane Creek Township

Court: US Supreme Court

..... v cane creek township 155 u s 283 1894 massachusetts and southern construction company v cane creek township no 112 submitted november 20 1894 decided december 8 1894 .....

Krishnabhupati Devu Vs. Ramamurti Pantulu and anr.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1895)ILR18Mad405

..... act act i of 1877 section 42 possession civil procedure code act xiv of 1882 section 319 constructive possession

Krishna Ayyan and ors. Vs. Vythianatha Ayyan

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1895)ILR18Mad252

..... can be supported 6 the second appeal is dismissed with costs hindu law stridhanam gift construction of provincial small cause courts act act ix of 1887 schedule ii article 18 suit .....

Lake Superior Ship Canal Andc.; Vs. Cunningham

Court: US Supreme Court

..... and sixty two is hereby confirmed unto the said peninsula railroad company provided it shall construct the railroad referred to according to the requirements of the act and resolution of congress ..... therefore the consideration of the grant was received and retained by the government any other construction than this would leave the provision as to state selections in michigan confirmed by the .....

Angle Vs. Chicago, St. P., M. and Omaha Ry. Co.

Court: US Supreme Court

..... company called in the opinion of the court the portage company for the purpose of constructing another and different and to some extent competing railroad the latter grant was conditioned upon ..... of willis gaylord to assist in extricating it from its embarrassments and in continuing the construction of its road william h schofield an experienced railway projector and financier was induced to .....

Barden Vs. Northern Pacific R. Co.

Court: US Supreme Court

..... and amendatory thereof by its first section the plaintiff was incorporated and authorized to construct and maintain a continuous railroad and telegraph line with the appurtenances from a point ..... expressly excluded is in terms prohibited besides the impossibility according to recognized rules of construction of incorporating in a statute a new term one inconsistent with its express declarations .....

Schlesinger Vs. Kansas City and Southern Ry. Co.

Court: US Supreme Court

..... the appellants to subject in satisfaction of their demand against the kansas city and southern construction company certain railroad property in the possession of and claimed by the kansas city and ..... for said railroad commencing at kansas city and running southwardly the kansas city and southern construction company took the property under the two deeds to it from brooks dated respectively february .....

United States Vs. Northern Pacific R. Co.

Court: US Supreme Court

..... congress approved july 2 1864 the northern pacific railroad company was incorporated with authority to construct and to maintain a continuous railroad and telegraph line beginning at a point on lake ..... extent of which is dependent upon the distance between those points the road should be constructed upon the most direct and practicable line no unnecessary deviation from such line would be .....

Burck Vs. Taylor

Court: US Supreme Court

..... that the said matthias schnell shall have the management and superintendence of the building and construction of said statehouse from the commencement to its completion subject to the direction and control ..... transfer and assign and have transferred and assigned to abner taylor the said contract to construct build erect complete and deliver to the state of texas a capitol building and appurtenances .....

Mobile and Ohio R. Co. Vs. Tennessee

Court: US Supreme Court

..... jurisdiction of this court the legal existence of the contract itself and its proper construction are necessarily involved in the question of the alleged impairment of the obligation thereof ..... capital stock together with the existing bonded indebtedness of the company represents the cost of constructing and equipping the railroad the legislature in granting the exemption in question doubtless had .....