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.
Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Co. et al., 1964 — 376 U.S. 941 · caselaw · US
General
Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Co. et al.
376 U.S. 941·Supreme Court of the United States·1964
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. 710.
Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Co. et al.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. The motion to strike the memorandum of the Solicitor General is denied. Probable jurisdiction noted.
Jordan Jay Hillman and John C. Danielson for appellant. Philip H. Porter and R. K. Merrill for appellees. Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick, Lionel Kestenbaum, Robert W. Ginnane and Arthur Cerra filed a memorandum for the United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission in support of appellant.