Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Minneapolis, St. Paul, & Sault Ste. Marie Railroad Company, in Error v. Louise Alexander, Administratrix, Etc
Minneapolis, St. Paul, & Sault Ste. Marie R.R. Co., in Error v. Louise Alexander, Adm’r, Adm’x, Etc, 239 U.S. 635 (1916)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1916-01-10
- Topic
- general
239 U.S. 635 36 S.Ct. 283 60 L.Ed. 479 MINNEAPOLIS, ST. PAUL, & SAULT STE. MARIE RAILROAD COMPANY, Plaintiff in Error, v. LOUISE ALEXANDER, Administratrix, etc. No. 148.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Minneapolis, St. Paul, & Sault Ste. Marie Railroad Company, in Error v. Louise Alexander, Administratrix, Etc. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
MINNEAPOLIS, ST. PAUL, & SAULT STE. MARIE RAILROAD COMPANY, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
LOUISE ALEXANDER, Administratrix, etc.
No. 148.
Supreme Court of the United States
January 10, 1916
Mr. William A. Hayes for plaintiff in error.
Mr. D. W. McNamara and Miss Anna B. Hull for defendant in error.
Per Curiam:
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) Consolidated Turnp. Co. v. Norfolk & O. V. R. Co. 228 U. S. 596, 600, 57 L. ed. 982, 983, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 609; Manhattan L. Ins. Co. v. Cohen, 234 U. S. 123, 137, 58 L. ed. 1245, 1254, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 874; Easterling Lumber Co. v. Pierce, 235 U. S. 380, 59 L. ed. 279, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 133; (2) Missouri P. R. Co. v. Humes, 115 U. S. 512, 29 L. ed. 463, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 110; Minneapolis & St. L. R. Co. v. Beckwith, 129 U. S. 26, 32 L. ed. 585, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 207; Minneapolis & St. L. R. Co. v. Emmons, 149 U. S. 364, 37 L. ed. 769, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 870; (3) Waters-Pierce Pierce Oil Co. v. Texas, 212 U. S. 112, 118, 53 L. ed. 431, 434, 29 Sup. Ct. Rep. 227; Deming v. Carlisle Packing Co. 226 U. S. 102, 57 L. ed. 140, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 80; Overton v. Oklahoma, 235 U. S. 31, 59 L. ed. 112, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 14.