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.
Grace TIFFIN, Special Administratrix of the Estate of John Tiffin, Deceased, v. TOLEDO, SAGINAW & MUSKEGON RAILWAY COMPANY, 1927 — 22 F.2d 1020 · caselaw · US
General
Grace TIFFIN, Special Administratrix of the Estate of John Tiffin, Deceased, v. TOLEDO, SAGINAW & MUSKEGON RAILWAY COMPANY
22 F.2d 1020·United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·1927
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
Grace TIFFIN, Special Administratrix of the Estate of John Tiffin, Deceased, v. TOLEDO, SAGINAW & MUSKEGON RAILWAY COMPANY.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
November 18, 1927.
No. 4877.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Michigan; Charles C. Simons, Judge.
Arthur P. Hicks and C. W. Hatfield, both of Detroit, Mich., for plaintiff in error.
H. R. Martin and Leo J. Carrigan, both of Detroit, Mich., for defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Dismissed for failure to file brief under rule 20.