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.
Williams v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.; Thomas v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.; and Neis v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co., 1948 — 333 U.S. 854 · caselaw · US
General
Williams v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.; Thomas v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.; and Neis v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.
333 U.S. 854·Supreme Court of the United States·1948
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. 512.
No. 513.
No. 514.
Williams v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.; Thomas v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.; and Neis v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.
W. L. Cunningham for petitioners.
R. S. Outlaw, Wm. J. Milroy and Sam D. Parker for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Supreme Court of Missouri. Certiorari denied.
Reported below: 356 Mo. 967, 204 S.W.2d 693.