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.
Berley MINARD, Appellant, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. et al., 1935 — 76 F.2d 1015 · caselaw · US
General
Berley MINARD, Appellant, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. et al.
76 F.2d 1015·United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·1935
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
Berley MINARD, Appellant, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. et al.
No. 10025.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Jan. 21, 1935.
J; W. McGan and Frank L. Burbridge, both of Omaha, Neb., and Clay C. Rogers and Don E. Black, both of Kansas City, Mo., for appellant.
Norris Brown, David A. Fitch, Ralph M. West, C. A. Magaw, and T. W. Bockes, all of Omaha, Neb., T. F. Hamer, of Kearney, Neb., and G. C. Holdrege, of Omaha, Neb., for appellee.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Appeal dismissed, with prejudice, but without costs to either party in this court, per stipulation of parties.