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.
DULUTH, WINNIPEG & PACIFIC RAILWAY CO., Appellant, v. Suomi KOSKI, as Administratrix, etc., 1924 — 2 F.2d 1015 · caselaw · US
General
DULUTH, WINNIPEG & PACIFIC RAILWAY CO., Appellant, v. Suomi KOSKI, as Administratrix, etc.
2 F.2d 1015·United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·1924
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
DULUTH, WINNIPEG & PACIFIC RAILWAY CO., Appellant, v. Suomi KOSKI, as Administratrix, etc.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
October 6, 1924.)
No. 6657.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota.
H. V. Mercer, Andrew N. Johnson, and Hector Baxter, all of Minneapolis, Minn., for appellant.
M. H. McMahon, Paul S. McMahon, and J. William Rahja, all of Virginia, Minn., for appellee.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Appeal dismissed, without costs to either party in this court, per stipulation of parties.