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.
ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY v. BROWN, 1895 — 156 U.S. 386 · caselaw · US
General
ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY v. BROWN
156 U.S. 38639 L. Ed. 461·Supreme Court of the United States·1895
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
ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY v. BROWN.
ERROR TO THE' CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE.
No. 632.
Submitted February 4, 1895.
Decided March 4, 1895.
McLish v. Roff, 141 U. S. 661, and Chicago, St. Paul &c. Railway v. Roberts, 141 U. S. 690, affirmed to the point that this Court has no jurisdiction to review in error or on appeal, in advance of the final judgment in the cause on the merits, an order of the Circuit Court of the United States remanding the cause to the state court from.which it had been removed to the Circuit Court.
Motion to dismiss.
Mr. Josiah Patterson for the motion.
Mr. PL. W. McCorry opposing.
[MAJORITY — The Chief Justice:]
The Chief Justice:
The writ of error is dismissed upon the authority of Railway Company v. Roberts, 141 U. S. 690, and McLish v. Roff, 141 U. S. 661. Dismissed.