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
Donald A. Curran, Plaintiff in Error, v. Chicago Short Line Railway Company
246 U.S. 655·Supreme Court of the United States·1918
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. 335.
Donald A. Curran, Plaintiff in Error, v. Chicago Short Line Railway Company.
In error to the Appellate Court, First District of the State of Illinois.
Motion to dismiss submitted April 15, 1918.
Decided April 22, 1918.
Mr. Morse Ives for plaintiff in error.
Mr. William Botkmann for defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the' authority of Miedreich v. Lauenstein, 232 U. S. 236, 243; Interstate Amusement Co. v. Albert, 239 U. S. 560, 566-567.