Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
O'Neill v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., 1955 — 348 U.S. 956 · caselaw · US
General
O'Neill v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co.
348 U.S. 95675 S. Ct. 447·Supreme Court of the United States·1955
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
March 7, 1955.
No. 105.
O’Neill v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co.
Argued March 2, 1955.
Decided March 7, 1955.
C. Richard Orieser argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner.
Robert F. Ebinger argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were E. H. Burgess, Kenneth H. Ekin and Arvin J. Alexander.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Certiorari, 348 U. S. 812, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Per Curiam:
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed and the ease is remanded to the District Court with instructions to reinstate its order dated July 30, 1952.