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.
TEXAS & NEW ORLEANS RAILROAD COMPANY v. GROSS, 1911 — 221 U.S. 417 · caselaw · US
General
TEXAS & NEW ORLEANS RAILROAD COMPANY v. GROSS
221 U.S. 41755 L. Ed. 796·Supreme Court of the United States·1911
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
TEXAS & NEW ORLEANS RAILROAD COMPANY v. GROSS.
ERROR to the court of civil appeals for the fourth
SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF TEXAS.
No. 832.
Submitted April 17, 1911.
Decided May 15, 1911.
Decided on authority of Texas & New Orleans R. R. Co. v. Miller, ante,, p. 408. '
The facts are stated in the opinion.
Mr. Maxwell Evarts, with whom Mr. H. M. Garwood and Mr. A. L. Jacksón -were on the brief, for plaintiff in error.
Mr. J. W. Parker for defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice Van Devanter]
Mr. Justice Van Devanter
delivered the opinion of the court.
This is a companion case with Texas & New Orleans R. R. Co. v. Miller, just decided, ante, p. 408, and arose out of the derailment of the same engine. It took substantially the same course in the state courts, (128 S. W. Rep. 1173), and presents substantially the same questions.
For the reasons given in the other case, the motion to dismiss is denied, and that to affirm is granted.
Affirmed.