A.L. REINSCHMIDT, D. J. REINSCHMIDT AND J. L. REINSCHMIDT, COPARTNERS, DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE FIRM NAME OF PENSACOLA COOPERAGE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
THE LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, AND L. G. CROSBY, APPELLEES

Fla. | 1925-10-16
Ellis and Terrell, J. J., concur., Whitfield, P. J., and Strum, J., concur, in the opinion,, Brown, J., not participating.
90 Fla. 334 Florida Supreme Court (1925) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's dismissal of a complaint seeking to enjoin railroad interference with factory track usage, finding that the allegations could establish equity for relief.

Holding

Yes, the lower court erred in sustaining the demurrer. The allegations in the bill of complaint, if proven, could establish equity for substantial relief.

Key Quotes

“To an amended bill of complaint seeking to enjoin defendants from -interrupting, or interfering with the use by complainants of certain railroad tracks from the main line of the defendant railroad company to the' factory of complainants or of obstructing such track, a demurrer was sustained and the bill dismissed.”

Describes the procedural posture and the core of the complaint.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence
Facts & Procedural History

Complainants, a cooperage company, filed a bill of complaint seeking to enjoin the defendant railroad company from interrupting or interfering with th…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Topics
Bill Of Complaint Equity Demurrer Injunction

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Bill Of Complaint cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
West, C. J.

West, C. J.

To an amended bill of complaint seeking to enjoin defendants from -interrupting, or interfering with the use by complainants of certain railroad tracks from the main line of the defendant railroad company to the' factory of complainants or of obstructing such track, a demurrer was sustained and the bill dismissed.

This appeal is from that order. Because of the somewhat complicated state of facts shown by the bill we shall not at this stage of the proceedings discuss the principles of law involved.

It is sufficient to say that under the allegations of the bill an equity for substantial relief may be shown by appropriate and sufficient evidence; therefore the demurrer to the bill of complaint should have been overruled. Florida East Coast R. Co. v. City of Miami, 80 Fla. 329, 86 So. 208; Wells v. Williams, 80 Fla. 498, 86 So. 336.

The order appealed from is reversed.

Reversed.

Ellis and Terrell, J. J., concur. Whitfield, P. J., and Strum, J., concur, in the opinion,

Brown, J., not participating.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Williams v. Dormany, 99 Fla. 496 (Fla. 1930)
    …wanting in equity i£ it states any ground for equitable relief. Orlando v. Equitable &c. Assn., 45 Fla. 507, 33 So. R. 986; Key West W. & C. Co. v. Porter, 63 Fla. 448, 58. So. R. 599, and other cases therein cited; Reinschmidt v. L. & N. R. R. Co., 90 Fla. 334, 106 So. R. 126. The bill is lacking in allegations that would elucidate matters' that are not made clearly to appear, and it is replete with conclusions that justify the criticism that it is not very skillfully drafted; but, for reasons hereinafte…
  • The Century Tr. Co. of Baltimore v. The Allison Realty Co., 105 Fla. 456 (Fla. 1932)
    …Fla. 208, 61 So. 579; Warren vs. Warren, 66 Fla. 138, 63 So. 726; Prince vs. Mahin, 73 Fla. 525, 74 So. 696; Downing vs. Carlton, 76 Fla. 490, 80 So. 57. See also Leavine vs. B. A. I. Ass’n., 88 Fla. 553, 102 So. 768; Reinschmidt vs. L. & N. R. Co., 90 Fla. 334, 106 So. 126; Prest vs. Hammock, 92 Fla. 941, 111 So. 112; Oakland Properties Corp. vs. Hogan, 96 Fla. 52, 118 So. 850; Dittmar vs. Woods-Hoskins-Young Co., 98 Fla. 513; 123 So. 919; Clapp vs. Coral Gables Corporation, 98 Fla. 1230, 125 So. 369; Sto…
  • Reinschmidt v. Crosby, 98 Fla. 365 (Fla. 1929)
    …on in this case, and from which the declaration alleged that certain trackage was wrongfully removed. Upon a demurrer being sustained to this bill, an appeal was taken to this Court and the order sustaining the demurrer to the bill was reversed. See 90 Fla. 334, 106 So. R. 126. [*367] In the declaration the plaintiffs briefly allege the filing of this bill and its purpose, the order sustaining the demurrer, the taking of an appeal, the action of this Court in reversing such order, and conclude with these w…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw