WRIGHT
v.
COLUMBUS, HOCKING VALLEY AND ATHENS RAILROAD COMPANY
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.
A mill owner who claimed he had made improvements to his property in reliance on a contract between the State and Federal Government sought to enjoin a railroad company from entering lands the company had purchased from the State. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's decision against the mill owner, holding that he had no legal right to rely on or enforce a contract to which he was not a party, and that his remedy for any breach would be limited to a damages claim rather than an injunction.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice Brown delivered the opinion of the court.
Plaintiff insisted before the Supreme Court that he made the improvements on his mill with reference to the contract between the State and the Federal Government, but the Supreme Court was of opinion that he had no legal right to make investments on the faith of a contract between others to which he was not a party or privy, and insist for that reason the contract should be observed by either of the parties; that, so far as related to the contract between Worthington and the State, his remedy would be in damages for breach of the contract, and not an injunction against the company entering upon the lands purchased from the State in which he had no interest. The decree against him was therefore affirmed.
The Federal question set up in the assignment of errors was precisely the same as in the other cases, and the issues which arise from such assignments are the only ones called to our attention by counsel. The judgment of the Supreme Court is therefore
Affirmed.