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.
Chicago & North Western Railway Co. et al. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. et al., 1966 — 383 U.S. 940 · caselaw · US
General
Chicago & North Western Railway Co. et al. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. et al.
383 U.S. 940·Supreme Court of the United States·1966
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 10, 1966.
No. 159.
Chicago & North Western Railway Co. et al. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. et al.
Nuel D. Belnap, Richard M. Freeman, Bryce L. Hamilton, Raymond K. Merrill, Nye F. Morehouse, John W. Adams, Martin L. Cassell and Frank R. Johnston for appellants. Douglas F. Smith, Howard J. Trienens, George L. Saunders, Jr., John E. McCullough, S. R. Brit-tingham, Jr., Monroe E. Clinton, Frank S. Farrell, Lawrence W. Hobhs, L. E. Torinus, Jr., and E. L. Van Dellen for Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. et al.; E. P. Porter, Alan C. Furth, Charles W. Burkett, Robert L. Pierce and Thormund A. Miller for Southern Pacific Co. et al., appellees.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal from D. C. S. D. Cal. Appeal as to appellant Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Co. dismissed pursuant to Rule 60 of the Rules of this Court.