Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corp. v. Wisconsin & Southern Railroad Corp.

Dist. Ct. did not err in finding that plaintiff-railroad was not entitled to injunction to prevent defendant-competitor railroad from using railway spur that defendant purchased from plaintiff for purpose of contracting with former customer of plaintiff to provide same railroad services where language of contract to sell said spur called for plaintiff to have exclusive rights to provide railroad services to plaintiff's existing customer on said spur. Terms of contract also allowed defendant to provide railroad services to "new customers" on said spur, and Dist. Ct. could properly conclude that purchaser of plant from plaintiff's former customer constituted new customer so as to allow defendant to solicit said purchaser for railroad services. Ct. rejected plaintiff's argument that customer's name in instant contract actually denoted customer's facility, so as to allow plaintiff exclusive right to provide railroad services to purchaser as long as plant was still in operation.