Case Name: Commonwealth versus The Wellsboro' and Tioga Plank-Road Company et al.
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1860
Citations: 35 Pa. 152
Docket Number: 
Parties: Commonwealth versus The Wellsboro’ and Tioga Plank-Road Company et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Pennsylvania State Reports
Volume: 35
Pages: 152–152

Head Matter:
Commonwealth versus The Wellsboro’ and Tioga Plank-Road Company et al.
,The Act of 26th January 1849 having provided a specific remedy against a plank-road company, for neglecting to keep its road in repair, a hill for an injunction will not lie, to restrain it from collecting toll until the proper repairs he made.
Appeal in Equity from the Common Pleas of Tioga county.
This was a bill in equity by The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, at the relation of the district attorney, against The Wellsboro’ and Tioga Plank-Road Company, and Edward Bayer, the owner thereof, for an injunction to restrain the collection of tolls on the said plank-road, where the same was not properly in order, or properly planked according to law.
The cause was heard on bill and answer, when the court below dissolved an interlocutory injunction that had been granted, and dismissed the complainant’s bill with costs; whereupon this appeal was taken.
J. Sherwood, for the appellant,
cited Act 26th January 1849, §§ 1, 21, Pamph. Laws 10, 13; Act 24th March 1851, §§ 1, 2, Pamph. Laws 405; Act 17th March 1853, §§ 8, 9, Pamph. Laws 204; Act 29th March 1856, §§ 1, 2, Pamph. Laws 193; Act 19th April 1853, §§ 1, 2, Pamph. Laws 342; Act 24th March 1859, Pamph. Laws 227.
Seymour, Sherwood, and Ryan, for the appellee,
cited Act 26th January 1849, §§ 14, 18, Brightly’s Purd. 814-15; Mulvany v. Kennedy, 4 Casey 44; Act 21st March 1806, Brightly’s Purd. 33; Brightly’s Equity, § 240.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The general plank-road law gives a special legal remedy for throwing open the turnpikes or toll-gates of roads that are not kept in order; and therefore this bill in equity for an injunction to effectuate the same object, cannot be allowed. And the action being improper, we cannot volunteer to decide any of the legal questions raised in it.
Decree affirmed.