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.
St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company, Petitioner, v. W. H. McLaughlin et al., 1916 — 241 U.S. 679 · caselaw · US
General
St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company, Petitioner, v. W. H. McLaughlin et al.
241 U.S. 679·Supreme Court of the United States·1916
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. 1026.
St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company, Petitioner, v. W. H. McLaughlin et al.
June 12, 1916.
Mr. Edward -A: IIaid, Mr. A. L. Burford and Mr. W. T. Wooldridge for the petitioner. Mr. George B. Rose, Mr.- W. E. Hemingway, Mr. J. F. Loughborough and Mr. V. M. Miles for the respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Coure ,of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.