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.
Futrelle, Administratrix, v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co., 1957 — 353 U.S. 920 · caselaw · US
General
Futrelle, Administratrix, v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co.
353 U.S. 920·Supreme Court of the United States·1957
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
No. 782.
Futrelle, Administratrix, v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co.
James B. Swails for petitioner. Louis J. Poisson, Jr. and M. V. Barnhill, Jr. for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded for trial. Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U. S. 500. Mr. Justice Frankfurter is of the opinion that the writ should not be granted. See his dissent in Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U. S. 500, 524. Mr. Justice Harlan and Mr. Justice Whittaker dissent for the reasons given in Mr. Justice Harlan's opinion in Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U. S. 500, 559.