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.
General
The Wichita Falls & Northwestern Railway Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. J. H. Puckett
242 U.S. 619·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. 535.
The Wichita Falls & Northwestern Railway Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. J. H. Puckett.
In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Oklahoma.
Motion to dismiss submitted December 11, 1916.
Decided December 18, 1916.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) Dower v. Richards, 151 U. S. 658, 668 et seq.; Thayer v. Spratt, 189 U. S. 346, 353; Waters-Pierce Oil Co. v. Texas, 212 U. S. 86, 97; Kerfoot v. Farmers’ & Merchants’ Bank, 218 U. S. 281, 288; (2) Deming v. Carlisle Packing Co., 226 U. S. 102, 105; Consolidated Turnpike v. Norfolk &c. Ry. Co., 228., U. S. 596, 600; Ennis Water Works v. Ennis, 233 U. S. 652, 658; Parker v. McLain, 237 U. S. 469, 471-472. Mr. Joseph M. Bryson, Mr. Alexander Britton and Mr. Evans Browne for the plaintiff in error. Mr. C. B. Stuart, Mr. A. C. Cruce, Mr. M. K. Cruce and Mr. Weldon M. Bailey for the defendant in error.