Civil Procedure · MBE-tested
Erie Railroad Co. et al. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. et al.; and New York Central Railroad Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. et al.
356 U.S. 970·Supreme Court of the United States·1958
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
June 2, 1958.
No. 465.
No. 466.
Erie Railroad Co. et al. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. et al.; and New York Central Railroad Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. et al.,
Samuel H. Moerman, Sidney Goldstein, Francis A. Mul-hern, Arthur L. Winn, Jr. and J. Stanley Payne for the Erie Railroad Co. et al., and Richard J. Murphy and Robert D. Brooks for the New York Central Railroad Co., appellants.
Edwin H. Burgess, Anthony P. Donadio, Norman C. Melvin, Jr., Francis D. Murnaghan, Jr., William C. Purnell and Jervis Langdon, Jr. for the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. et al., William L. Marbury and Donald Macleay for the Maryland Port Authority, Harry C. Ames and Charles McD. Gillan for the Baltimore Association of Commerce, and Thomas N. Biddison for the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, appellees.
[MAJORITY]
355 U. S. 175. The motion to recall and clarify the judgment is denied.
Reported below: 151 F. Supp. 258.