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.
Great Northern Railway Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Anna Roach, as Administratrix, etc., 1917 — 242 U.S. 624 · caselaw · US
General
Great Northern Railway Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Anna Roach, as Administratrix, etc.
242 U.S. 624·Supreme Court of the United States·1917
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. 695.
Great Northern Railway Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Anna Roach, as Administratrix, etc.
In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Minnesota.
Argued January 29, 1917.
Decided February 5, 1917.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Judgment affirmed with costs upon the authority of Chicago Junction Railway Co. v. King, 222 U. S. 222; Seaboard Air Line Railway v. Padgett, 236 U. S. 668; Great Northern Railway Co. v. Knapp, 240 U. S. 464; Baltimore & Ohio R. R. Co. v. Whitacre, ante, 169. Mr. A. L. Janes, Mr. E. C. Lindley and Mr. M. L. Countryman for the plaintiff in error. Mr. Ernest W. Michel and Mr. Tom Davis for the defendant in error.