Lukens v. Lasher

Decided April 21, 1902

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1902-04-21

Appeal, No. 369, Jan. T., 1901, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., June T., 1901, No. 1504, dismissing bill in equity in case of W. H. R. Lukens and Samuel H. K. Kirkpatrick v. George F. Lasher. Bill in equity for an injunction to restrain the use of a wall. From the record it appeared that the plaintiffs were trustees of the Odd Fellows Temple at Broad and Cherry streets, Philadelphia, and that defendant was the owner of adjoining premises to the east.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently October 1935

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1902-04-21

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Opinion by

Mr. Justice Fell,

¶2The case presented by the plaintiff did not call for equitable interference by injunction. If the wall was not strictly a party wall, by common consent of the parties it had been so treated. The negotiations for the price to be paid for its use were with the mutual understanding that it was a party wall, and they terminated in an agreement on a sum, subject to be enlarged or diminished by a measurement, which was paid by the defendant. As there was not a final adjustment of the matter of compensation, it would have been better that the decree should have reserved any right the plaintiff may have in that regard. To avoid any question in the future, the decree is amended so that the dismissal of the bill is without prejudice to the right of the plaintiffs to recover whatever may be due them, and as so amended the decree is affirmed.